The trial Court observed that the plaintiff filed a Memo along with the certified copy of the registered sale deed, dated 18.08.2011, which showed that the first respondent/first defendant alienated Acs.0.18 guntas of land in Survey No.193/E1 in favour of one Tegala Venkanna from whom, respondents 12 and 13 purchased the property under registered sale deed, dated 23.03.2013. The trial Court, thus, observed that during the pendency of the suit, the first respondent/first defendant executed the registered sale deed for Acs.0.18 guntas of land in favour of Tegala Venkanna, who in turn by way of a registered sale deed sold the property to respondents 12 and 13. Therefore, the request of the petitioner/plaintiff to implead respondents 12 and 13 is a genuine one since respondents 12 and 13 are subsequent purchasers of part of the suit property. On the said observation, the trial Court held that respondents 12 and 13 are necessary parties to the suit and hence, allowed the application and permitted the plaintiff to implead respondents 12 and 13 as defendants 12 and 13. Aggrieved, the first defendant filed the instant petition.
