NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH, J.

The Stamp Report is that the instant Letters Patent Appeal, purportedly filed under Clause 10 of the Patna High Court Rules Letters Patent, is not maintainable. On this question of maintainability, we have heard the learned counsel for the appellant at length.

2. The facts relevant for deciding the question are that in a pending Second Appeal, an interlocutory application was filed by purchasers of certain property during pendency of suit. They wanted to be impleaded as the interest in the suit property had been purchased by them. That intervention application was allowed and the interveners were directed to be added as intervener-respondents. The appellant, in the intra-Court appeal, was the defendant in the Title Suit who had preferred appeal against the original decree and succeeded. He was also one of the respondents in the Second Appeal. His plea, in this intra-Court appeal, is that the second appellate Court, that is this Court dealing with the Second Appeal, had no jurisdiction to add parties. Therefore, this Court exceeded the jurisdiction of a second appellate Court. The jurisdiction could only be found in Article 226 of the Constitution a