JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners for setting aside the order dated 25.04.2018 passed by the learned Sub Judge-VI, Bettiah, West Champaran in Title Suit No.25 of 2011 whereby an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘CPC’) filed by the petitioners on 12.10.2017 has been rejected.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the trial court has erred in law as also on facts in passing the order impugned dated 25.04.2018. He contended that it failed to appreciate that the petitioners are necessary parties in the suit for specific performance of contract, as in respect of the same land, which is in dispute, an agreement to sale was made by the vendor with the petitioners on 04.09.2017. According to him, the objection raised by the opposite party-plaintiff to the addition of the petitioners-interveners as necessary parties is unsustainable. He pleaded that the interveners-petitioners are also basing their claim over the suit property on the basis of agreement to sale made in their favour. In that view of the matte