KAILASH PRASAD SAHU Vs. VIDYA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Ravish Agrawal, learned Sr. Counsel with Shri Akhilesh Jain, learned counsel for the applicant Shri Deepak Agrawal in I.A. No. 603/13. They are heard on I.A. No. 603/13 an application filed by Shri Deepak Agrawal under Order 22 Rule 10 C.P.C. making a prayer to implead him as appellant no. 2 and to prosecute the appeal.

(2.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant Kailash Prasad challenging the judgment and decree dated 23/11/11 whereby plaintiff respondent's Smt. Vidya Bai suit for specific performance has been decreed.

(3.) Applicant Deepak Agrawal claims to have purchased the suit property from the appellant defendant on 25/11/10 by registered sale deed and he has filed the application on the ground that he has a right to the property by virtue of the sale and the property was sold to him concealing the fact about pendency of the civil suit, even though the application submitted before the trial Court under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. had been rejected, Shri Ravish Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicant invites our attention to the law recently laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Thomson Press (India) Ltd. Vs. Nanak Builders, 2013 5 SCC 397 to say that the application can be allowed and the applicant can be impleaded as a party.