SURENDRA KUMAR VERMA Vs. RAM BHAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Plaintiff filed a suit for demolition of a chajjha. The suit was decreed in the year 1987. It has been put for execution. It appears that during the pendency of the execution proceedings, the judgment debtor has transferred the property to one Sri Mohal Lal in the year 1997 and, thereafter, on 06.02.2003 Sri Mohal Lal has sold the property to the Petitioners. In the execution proceeding the Petitioners moved an application under Order 22 Rule 10 Code of Civil Procedure for making him as party and to be heard and also filed objection under Order 47 Code of Civil Procedure The same has been rejected by the impugned order dated 25.03.2011.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Petitioners being the subsequent purchasers are entitled to be heard as his right will be affected and, therefore, they should be impleaded and their objection should be considered. He placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Devendra Kumar Sarewgee and Ors. v. Purbanchal Estates (P) Ltd, and Ors. reported in, (2006) 9 SCC 199 and also the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Raj Kumar v. Sardari Lal and Ors. reported in, 2004 2 SCC 601.

(3.) Having heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner, I have perused the impugned order and the judgment cited by learned Counsel for the Petitioner.