Application to implead as party defendants allowed to protect title of bona fide purchasers who acquired property based on a grant later revoked by this court. Imperial.
Applicants impleaded as defendants 3 to 5 in the testamentary original 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.
A.No.1330 of 2021 in T.O.S.No.1 of 2021
A.No.1330 of 2021 in T.O.S.No.1 of 2021
R.SUBRAMANIAN.J.,
The applicants who are third parties to the testamentary original suit
seeks to implead themselves as party defendants to the suit.
2. Originally the respondents 1 and 2 herein filed a petition in O.P.No.755 of 2014 and obtained Letters of Administration for the Will said to have been executed by one T.D.Ranganathan on 22.08.2002. The said T.D.Ranganathan had died on 28.05.2006. This Court had in fact granted Letters of Administration by order dated 18.04.2016. Subsequently, at the instance of the respondents 3 and 4 herein, the grant was revoked by this Court and the original petition was converted into a testamentary original suit.
3. In the interregnum, the original petitioners viz., the respondents 1 and
2 herein had sold the property to the applicants, therefore the applicants now seek to implead themselves as defendants.
4. Though this application is opposed on the ground that the applicants
do not have a caveatable interest, I do not think that the applicants should be
Page No.1/3
A.No.1330 of 2021 in T.O.S.No.1 of 2021
shown the door on the sole ground that they did not have caveatable interest. No doubt, caveatable interest is required for a person to be a party to a testamentary original suit, but, in this case, since the sale has happened based on the grant made by this Court which was subsequently revoked by this Court, I am of the considered opinion that the applicants who claim to be bonafide purchasers based on the grant made by this Court should atleast be allowed to participate in the proceedings, in order to avoid any further damage to their title and to keep a watch on the conduct of the plaintiffs in prosecuting the testamentary original suit. They are atleast proper parties to the proceedings since they had acquired the interest in the subject matter of the suit. It is made clear that the newly added parties will be in the party array only to watch proper conduct of the proceedings by the plaintiffs.
5. Accordingly, this application is allowed . The applicants are
impleaded as defendants 3 to 5 in the testamentary original suit. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs to carry out amendment and file amended copy of the plaint in the testamentary original suit.
dsa
18.06.2021
Page No.2/3
A.No.1330 of 2021 in T.O.S.No.1 of 2021
dsa
R.SUBRAMANIAN,J.
A.No.1330 of 2021
in
T.O.S.No.1 of 2021
18.06.2021
Page No.3/3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants, who became owners due to the sale of property based on a subsequentely revoked grant, should be allowed to implead as defendants.
Whether a party lacking a caveatable interest should be denied impleadment if they bought the subject property relying on a court order later quashed.
Applicants
Respondents 1 and 2
Respondents 3 and 4
R.Subramanian J
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
