In the light of the said legal principles, in the instant case, it is found that the applicants/transferees sought their impleadment after five years of getting the sale deed, at the stage of appeal. The transfer of interest in the suit property in their favour of the plaintiffs was without a clear title in the suit property. Admittedly, the plaintiffs/transferors continued to pursue the suit proceedings despite alienation of their interest in the suit property. The declaration of rights of the plaintiff in the suit property is subject to decision in the appeal as it is continuation of the trial. There is nothing on record that the plaintiffs have lost interest in the suit or not in a position to pursue the same. The transfer of interest in the suit property, therefore, cannot be said to be bonafide act on the part of the plaintiff. The presence of transferee, in the instant case, if allowed, may complicate the proceedings of appeal. Moreover, the defendants are in possession of the suit property which is a residential house and a third party who has no independent right or interest in the said property, cannot be allowed to be added at the stage of appeal. For the refusal of prayer of the applicant to add them as respondents in appeal, no prejudice would be caused to them, inasmuch as, their rights are still subservient to that of the plaintiffs and depend on the fate of the Civil appeal, which is being contested by the plaintiffs/respondents.
