3.During the pendency of the suit, the respondents 1 and 2 in the present Civil Revision Petition filed an interlocutory application in I.A.No.471 of 2012 to implead them as parties to the suit. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the respondents 1 and 2 stated that the property comprised in Survey No.43/16 (29 cents) and the property in Survey No.44/5 (8 cents) which are described as item Nos.84 and 88 were purchased by them by a sale deed dated 10.01.2011. It is stated that the plaintiff, who is the third respondent in the present Civil Revision Petition, had earlier sold the property along with others by a sale deed dated 30.12.2010 in favour of one Mohammed Ismail, son of C.R.Abdul Quidose and that they are in possession and enjoyment of the property after they purchased on 10.01.2011. Having regard to the facts narrated in the affidavit, it was contended by the respondents 1 and 2 that the plaintiff had no right in the property and that his rights had been acquired by respondents 1 and 2. Taking note of the facts narrated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the trial Court allowed the petition as the respondents 1 and 2 have claimed to be in possession of the property through the sale deed alleged to have been executed by the plaintiff along with another on 20.01.2010. As against the order passed by the trial Court allowing the petition to implead the respondents 1 and 2 in the Civil Revision Petition as parties to the suit, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the first defendant in the suit.
