ORDER :

1. By order dated 10.02.2010 passed in Civil Original Suit No.282/2004 (58/97), the learned trial Judge has rejected the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C. Since rejection of plaint is a ‘decree’ as defined in Section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, this appeal has been filed under Section 96 of C.P.C. challenging the aforesaid rejection.

3. Thereafter, plaintiff-Pushpchand filed an application for disclosure of the name of lis pendens purchasers but late Kalu Ram could disclose name of a few and stated in the petition that since the sale-deed is a registered document, plaintiff can obtain certified copy and get name of the purchasers. But the course adopted by the trial Court was that defence of Kalu Ram was rejected.

5. Consequently, the suit was decreed in favour of plaintiff- Pushpchand by judgment and decree dated 18.04.1996.

7. Thereafter, almost all the 63 purchasers by different petitions filed under Order I Rule 10 C.P.C. desired to be impleaded in the execution proceeding as party. But all the petitions were rejected on 31.7.1997 on the ground that neither they were decree holder nor judgment debtor.

9.