This court disposed of a civil revision petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The court denied the plea to implead the Subahdar as Plaintiffs 2 and 3 in an existing suit for declaration, imposing them instead as defendants 7 and 8.
Implead the petitioners as defendants 7 and 8 in the pending suit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
SMT JUSTICE T. RAJANI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.215 of 2019
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition is filed by proposed plaintiffs 2 and 3, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to set aside the order, dated 16.11.2018 passed in I.A.No.499 of 2017 in O.S. No.10 of 2009, by virtue of which, the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Penukonda, dismissed the petition filed by them under Order I Rule 10 of CPC to implead them as Plaintiffs 2 and 3 in the suit.
1 2014(1)ALT 383
2
Kedarnath Lal (died) by his legal representatives Vs
Sheonarain2 , it was held that ‘subsequent purchasers are necessary parties to the suit for declaration, as they have acquired interest in the entire property, which is the subject matter of the suit’. It also observed that ‘there is a possibility of the 1st respondent therein not properly defending the appeal and are colluded with the appellant’.
5. Another Judgment relied by the counsel for petitioners in Lebaka Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy Vs Ambavaram Narayanamma3 , which is also to the same effect.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in the Civil Revision petition shall stand closed.
October 18, 2019 MP
2 air 1970 sc 1717
3 2013(6)ALT 516
_____________ T. RAJANI, J
1 issue framed by the court
Whether subsequent purchasers of suit property can be impleaded as plaintiffs in a suit for declaration filed during the suit's pendency?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
K.Srinivasulu Vs Jaldu Subramanyam ChettuReferred¶7
2014(1)ALT 383
Kedarnath Lal (died) by his legal representatives Vs SheonarainReferred¶7
2014(1)ALT 383 - citing 2 air 1970 sc 1717 and 2013(6)ALT 516 · Who else cites this
Lebaka Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy Vs Ambavaram NarayanammaReferred¶8
2013(6)ALT 516
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Justice T. Rajani (Petitioner)
Senior Civil Judge, Penukonda (Respondent)
T. RAJANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
