SWASTIK DEVELOPERS Vs. SAKET KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit. By consent of Counsel and at their request, taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) The appeal arises from an order of a Learned Single Judge by which the Chamber Summons for amendment of a plaint in a suit for specific performance has been allowed. The First and Second Appellants are Defendants in the suit for specific performance which has been instituted by the First and Second Respondents. The Third Appellant has been impleaded as a party to the suit, in view of the fact that he has entered into an agreement on 2 August 2008 with the First Appellant. The agreement of the Third Appellant is subsequent to the agreement of the original Plaintiff. The Third Appellant claims under the First Appellant and does not claim a title adverse to that of his vendor. The Third Appellant is the father of the Second Appellant.

(3.) The suit for specific performance has been instituted by the First and Second Respondents against the First and Second Appellants for enforcement of a letter of allotment dated 10 November 2005. The subject matter of the suit for specific performance is a residential flat, Flat No.303, admeasuring 1055 sq.ft. in Sadguru Complex, D-Wing, Phase-I, General A.K.Vaidya Marg, Goregaon (East), Mumbai. On 2 August 2008 an agreement was entered into between the First Appellant and the Third Appellant. The Second Appellant is a partner of the First Appellant, while the Third Appellant is his father. By the proposed amendment, the First and Second Respondents sought to implead the Third Appellant who claims to be a subsequent purchaser. Admittedly, the Third Appellant claims title under the First Appellant and under a subsequent agreement dated 2 August 2008.