DAMYANTIBAI Vs. TRIMBAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT . Heard learned counsel Shri Tare for the Applicant, Shri S.J. Salunke, learned counsel for Respondent No.1 and Shri K.J. Ghute Patil, learned A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the material placed on record. The matter is heard finally.

(2.) CIVIL Revision Application has been filed against orders dated 7th July 2012, passed below Exhibit 27 in Regular Civil Suit No.237 of 2012 by the 5th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad. The said Application was filed by the present Applicant, who is defendant No.1 in that suit. It was claimed that the original Plaintiff (present Respondent No.1) had played fraud on the Court and obtained orders. It was claimed that the original Plaintiff had moved the proceedings of M.A. No.36 of 2003 in Regular Darkhast No.32 of 1999, which was rejected. The present Applicant claimed that the sale deed concerned was void and that the suit was not tenable as per Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("C.P.C." for short).

(3.) LEARNED counsel for Respondent No.1 is submitting that Respondent No.1 was not party to the earlier litigation and he is purchaser when the first appeal was pending. Thus, according to him, Section 47 of C.P.C. does not apply and the claim of the Applicant that the suit is not maintainable, cannot be accepted.