( 1 ) ). RULE. Mr. B. T. Rao, learned advocate for respondent No. 1, waives service of rule. 1. 1 rajendrasinh Bharatsinh Sarvaiya, petitioner, original third party, has filed this Revision Application under Section 115 of the C. P. C. , challenging the judgement and order dated 11. 2. 2002 passed by the Second Joint Civil Judge (S. D.), Bhavnagar - order below Exh. 12 in Regular Civil Suit No. 465 of 2001. The learned Judge by his impugned judgement was pleased to reject the application at Exh. 12 filed by the petitioner for joining as party defendant under the provisions of Order 1 Rule 10 of the C. P. C.

( 2 ) THERE is a property situated at Krishnanagar, near Manekwadi, on Municipal Leasehold plot bearing Survey No. 558-559/b, admeasuring 719. 56 sq. mtr. at Bhavnagar (hereinafter referred to as "the suit property". BACKGROUND OF THE MATTER:

( 3 ) DINESHBHAI Rajaram Makwana and Rajeshbhai Rajaram Makwana purchased the suit property from one Mr. Bhogilal Prahladbhai Patel of Vallabhbhai and Savitaben Patel on 23. 8. 1991 by registered Sale Deed and thereby they became owner of the said suit property. 3. 1 it appears from the record that Shri Dineshbhai Rajaram and Rajeshbhai Rajaram (hereinafter referred to as "the original owners") had transferred the suit property to Sanjeev A. Jain and Neeta S. Jain by unregistered Agreement to Sale dated 3. 6. 1994. Sajeev A. Jain and Neeta S. Jain had transferred the suit property by unregistered Sale Agreement dated 28. 12. 1999 to Kadarbhai K. Pirwani. The possession of the property was handed over to Kadarbhai K. Pirwani, respondent No. 2. It appears that thereafter Kadarbhai K. Pirwani, respondent No. 1, by Satakhat dated 24. 7. 2001, had transferred the suit property in favour of Kiritsinh B. Jadeja, respondent No. 1 which Sale Deed came to be registered on 25. 7. 2001 by Kadarbhai K. Pirwani. 3. 2 it appears that the original owner transferred the suit property by registered Sale Deed on 30. 10. 2001 in favour of Rajendrasinh B. Sarvaiya. PRESENT CONTROVERSY:

( 4 ) IT appears that Kiritsinh B. Jadeja, respondent No. 1 herein, original plaintiff filed suit for declaration and injunction regarding the suit property against Kadarbhai K. Pirwani, respondent No. 2, before the learned Civil Judge (S. D.), Bhavnagar, being Regular Civil Suit No. 465 of 2001. The said suit was filed on 18. 9. 2001. Along with the said suit, the plaintiff filed an application for temporary injunction and also filed another application for an appointment of Court Commissioner. In the plaint and other related application the plaintiff prayed that the defendant has given Satakhat which is produced at Exh. marked 4/1. The plaintiff submitted that they have requested the defendant for sale deed but the defendant is not prepared to execute the Sale Deed. In view of the same, from the record it appears that the defendant has tried to sell the suit property to somebody else. In view of the same, the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and injunction praying inter alia that the defendant who claimed to be owner be restrained from alienating or transferring the property to anybody else through himself or through his agent, servant and he cannot create any third party right in the suit property in this regard. It may be noted that in the said suit the plaintiff alleged that the defendant is the owner and in possession of the suit property. The defendant may not execute any sale deed except in favour of the plaintiff.

( 5 ) IN this matter the trial court by its order dated 24. 9. 2001 granted injunction in favour of the plaintiff as the defendant failed to execute the sale deed. Originally the trial court granted ex-parte injunction on 18. 9. 2001. Thereafter, on 24. 9. 2001 the learned trial Court passed order below Exh. 5 confirming the order of injunction which was granted on 18. 9. 2001. From the record it appears that the defendant did not seriously contest the suit of the plaintiff.

( 6 ) THE pr