Sachutha v. Mr.D.Mohan
Case brief
What is this about?
In this C.M.P., the court examined the petitioner's prayer to implead respondents who purchased the suit property during pendency. Holding that they are neither necessary nor proper parties, the petition was dismissed.
What did the court decide?
Petition to implead respondents 12 to 15 dismissed.
What the court decided
C.M.P.No.6444 of 2021 in A.S.No.299 of 2018
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. and R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
This petition has been filed seeking to implead the respondents 12 to 15, who are the purchasers of the property subject matter of the suit pending suit.
2. The suit was filed as early as in 2005 and the proposed parties have purchased the property during the pendency of the suit. Hence, they are neither necessary nor proper parties to the suit.
3. In view of the same, this petition is dismissed.
(R.S.M., J.) (R.S.V., J.) 02.04.2024
dsa
1/1
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether purchasers of property during pendency of suit are necessary or proper parties to be impleaded.
Coram
R. Subramanian
R. Sakthivel
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court