SOUMEN SEN, J.

This revisional application is arising out of an order passed by the learned Trial Judge refusing to add the petitioners as parties in a suit instituted by the opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 against the opposite parties Nos. 3 to 8.

2. In order to decide the present revisional application and find out whether the learned Trial Judge exercised his discretion properly in refusing to add the petitioners in the suit instituted by the opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 against the rest of the opposite parties, the scope of the suits that are presently pending before the Trial Judge is required to be examined.

3. In or about April, 2005 the petitioners instituted a suit being Title Suit No. 50 of 2005 against the opposite parties praying for a declaration that the compromise decree obtained in Title Suit No. 90 of 2004 by the opposite parties is void and not binding on the plaintiffs, and the sale deed by defendants'/owners in favour of M/s. Packard Exports Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Ritman Commercial Pvt. Ltd. is fraudulent and not binding on the plaintiff. In the said plaint, it is alleged by the said petitioners that the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 with ulterior motive had purchased t