SUNIL KHAN Vs. ANUPAM HOUSING P LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.7.1998, passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Agra in Suit No. 306 of 1998 whereby the application of the revisionist for impleadment as defendant was rejected.

(2.) The plaintiff opposite party No. 1, Anupam Housing Private Limited, filed suit against U. P. Industrial Corporation Limited and Agra Development Authority for decree of specific performance of the contract as described in the relief clause and for future compensation/damages as may be granted by the Court. During the pendency of the said suit, the revisionist moved an application, under Order I, Rule 10, C.P.C., for impleadment as defendant on the ground that the defendant No. 1, had auctioned the plot in question to the applicant by auction dated 30th March, 1998, by accepting highest bid made by the applicants. The applicants bid was for Rs. 95 lacs. The bid has not yet been rejected and 25% of the amount of contract consideration has been realized from the applicants. The applicants being bona fide highest bidders are entitled to the execution of the lease-deed in their favour. The bid of the plaintiff was not accepted and there was no privity of contract between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 1, The defendant No. 1, was free to reject the offer made by the plaintiff unless it was confirmed by defendant No. 1. The plaintiff approached the Hon'ble High Court by filing a writ petition which was dismissed and the plaintiff filed Special Leave Petition which was ultimately got dismissed as withdrawn. The offer of the applicants being highest and the same having been accepted has become a concluded contract and a right is created in favour of the applicants. Therefore, the applicants are proper and necessary parties to the suit.

(3.) The said application was contested by the plaintiff, opposite party No. 1, mainly on the ground that the suit was filed for decree of specific performance of the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant and the third party has no locus standi unless there was concluded contract between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 1.