(1.) The petitioners herein are third parties to O.S. No. 69 of 1989 and they have filed this revision against the order made in I.A. No. 452 of 1994 in O.S. No. 69 of 1989, dated 27.11.1995, dismissing the said I.A. which was filed to implead themselves as petitioners in I.A. No. 504 of 1993.
(2.) The suit was filed by one A. P Ramalingam the respondent herein against one Ranga Gounder for specific performance viz., to direct the said Ranga Gounder to execute the sale with regard to the suit property in pursuance of the agreement dated 16.11.1987 and for delivery of possession of the suit property and for costs. The said suit was decreed and to set aside the ex parte decree, the defendant Ranga Gounder filed I.A. No. 504 of 1993 and during the pendency of the said application, he died on 25.8.1993. The legal heirs of the said Ranga Gounder did not take any steps to continue the proceedings. In the meanwhile the property which is the subject matter of the suit was sold by Ranga Gounder in favour of the present petitioner's Vellaya Gounder and Sevi Gounder who were third parties. On coming to know of the pendency of the suit they filed I.A. No. 452 of 1994 under Order 22, Rule 10, C.P.C. to implead them -selves as parties as petitioners 2 and 3 in the said I.A. No. 504 of 1993 and also to continue the proceedings, in the suit for specific performance. It is their case that the defendant Ranga Gounder had executed a sale deed in respect of the suit property on 9.6.1989 itself and the defendant received suit summons after the sale and appeared and contested the suit and there -upon filed I.A. No. 504 of 1993 to set aside the ex parte decree. The said application was resisted by the respondent and the lower court however, by its order dated 27.11.1995 dismissed the said I.A. and aggrieved by the said order, the above revision has been filed.
(3.) I have heard Mr. A.K. Kumaraswamy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.V. Ramachandran for the respondent/plaintiff.