YOGESH Vs. KESHAV VISTARI SONTAKKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notices for final disposal of the matter were issued by this Court on 0952013. In spite of service of notices, none appears for the respondents. It is, therefore, not necessary for this Court to issue fresh notices.

(2.) Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard Shri B.M. Kharkate, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

(3.) By the impugned order dated 20112012 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Bramhapuri, the application Exhibit 37 filed in Regular Civil Suit No.59 of 2010 under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code by the petitioner for being joined as plaintiff in the suit, has been rejected. The trial Court has held that on the date when the suit was filed the petitioner was not the owner of the suit property, but the original plaintiffs had claimed the ownership of the suit property. The petitioner claims to have purchased the suit property during the pendency of the suit by registered sale deed dated 2672011. The trial Court has held that the transfers during the pendency of the suit are hit by principle of lis pendens incorporated under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. It has been held that in such circumstances, it cannot be said that the presence of such person may be necessary in order to enable the court effectively and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit.