V DAMODARAN Vs. THULASIRAMA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second appeal is focussed by D5, D10 to D14, and LRs of deceased D4/V.Damodaran animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 4.3.2010 passed in A.S. No. 4 of 2009 by the Subordinate Judges Court, Vaniyambadi, Vellore District, confirming the judgment and decree of the Principal District Munsif Court, Ambur, Vellore District in O.S. No. 24 of 1996. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.

(2.) COMPENDIOUSLY and concisely, the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this Second Appeal would run thus: (a) The first respondent herein and the deceased Dhanalakshmi Ammal filed the suit seeking the following reliefs as against several defendants, including the appellants herein in this Second Appeal:

(3.) THE nitty-gritty and the gist and kernel of the arguments as put forth by the learned senior counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs would run thus: (a) THEre are catena of decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court that pendente lite purchasers are having no right to set up any independent case of their own and that they are bound by the ultimate decision. (b) Simply because the plaintiffs thought fit to implead the purchasers pendente lite for the purpose of avoiding future litigation, that it does not mean that the plaintiffs are estopped from contending that such pendente lite purchasers are having no right to contest the matter and adduce evidence. (c) Both the Courts below appropriately and appositely, convincingly and correctly rejected the endeavour of the purchasers pendente lite to cross examine the plaintiffs' witness and to adduce evidence, warranting no interference in the Second Appeal.