therefore, at the stage of passing preliminary decree, he is not a necessary party, as his interests are taken care of by his vendors. Therefore, the transferee pendente lite are necessary parties for complete, effective and adequate adjudication of the dispute while passing the final decree, as allotment of properties would be made only in the final decree. In such situation, it must be held that the suit is liable to be dismissed for non impleadment of transferee pendente lite and as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in (2007) 1 SC 519, (Dhanalakshmi and others Vs. P.Mohan and others), the transferee pendente lite are entitled to come on records in order to work out the equity in their favour in the final decree proceedings. In that reported case, the persons purchased undivided share of a co-sharers, prior to the filing of the suit for partition and purchasers filed an application to get themselves impleaded in the suit for partition and in that context, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that by reason of the purchase by a third party of the undivided share in the suit property, the rights of the plaintiff will not be affected and the purchasers, having purchased the property from some of the co-sharers are entitled to come on record in order to work out the equity in their favour in the final decree proceedings. Though in that suit, preliminary decree passed was set aside, according to me, the Hon'ble Supreme Court set aside the
