P. RAMACHANDRA RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners are the third parties who are questioning the order refusing to implead them as defendant Nos. 6 and 7 in O. S. No. 162/82 on the file of the Subordinate Judge s Court. Vijayawada.

( 2 ) THE first respondent is (sic) (has?) filed the suit for specific performance of an agreement against the defendant Nos. 1 to 5. Defendant Nos. 4 and 5 who are the original owners of the suit property, sold the same to the petitioners under two separate sale deeds dated 2-11-1988 and 2-2-1989. As the defendant Nos. 4 and 5 have sold away their property, they lost interest in the suit proceedings and if they do not prosecute the suit diligently, the petitioners who purchased the property, would suffer serious hardship. Therefore; they filed I. A. 2361/89 under Order 1, Rule 10 C. P. C. to implead them as defendant Nos. 6 and 7 on the ground that they are proper and necessary parties to the suit, being the subsequent purchasers. The said application was dismissed by the lower Court holding that they are not proper and necessary parties to the suit and their remedy is to work out their rights by way of a separate suit. Challenging the said order, this revisi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document