SMT.BHAGMANI DEVI Vs. MOST.KABIRAJ DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) and section 151 C.P.C. filed by 45 persons for being added as interveners-appellants in this appeal on the ground that during the pendency of this appeal all the purchasers interveners have purchased different area of disputed land from the appellant. Learned, Sr. counsel Sri Sidheshwari Prasad Sinha, appearing for the interveners submitted that after purchase they have acquired title in the property in suit and, therefore, they are vitally interested in this appeal. According to the learned Senior counsel if the interveners are not added as appellants then they will not be able to protect their interest. The learned Senior counsel further submitted that even if they are not necessary parties but being subsequent transferee are proper parties. Therefore, he prayed that they may be added as appellant.

(2.) The learned counsel for the appellant in support of his contentions relied upon two decisions (i) Amit Kumar Shaw and another V/s. Farida Khatoon and Another, 2005 AIR(SC) 2209 (ii) Bal Mukund Singh V/s. Gautam Singh., 2009 3 PLJR 14

(3.) On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the interveners are pendente lite transferee and therefore, transfer is hit under Section 52 of T.P. Act and, therefore, they are neither necessary party nor proper party and as a matter of right they cannot claim for being added as party in this appeal. In support of his contention the learned counsel relied upon Sarvinder Singh V/s. Dalip and others, 1996 5 SCC 539 and Bibi Zubaida Khatoon V/s. Nabi Hassan Saheb., 2004 1 PLJR(SC) 66