Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Gopal Prasad Sahu S/o Late Lalit Narayan Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Nand Kishore Sahu S/o Late Lalit Narayan Sahu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Choubey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Avilash Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. Nos. 1 to 8 and Mr. Madhav Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. Nos. 9 to 11.
2. At the outset, Mr. Choubey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner restricts this petition for the petitioner under Order-I Rule 10 CPC. and he is not pressing the petition under Order-VI Rule-17 of the CPC, which was also the subject matter of the impugned order.
3. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein prayer has been made for setting aside the order dated 17.01.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-II, Ranchi, in Original Suit No. 406 of 2017, wherein the Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 566 of 2024, filed by the petitioner under Order-I Rule-10 of the CPC for impleading the persons, who have purchased the land in question by the registered sale deeds as defendant Nos. 6 to 11 (proposed defendants 6 to 12) has been rejected by the learned court.
4. Mr. Choubey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that plaintiff/petitioner instituted a p
A transferee of property involved in suit proceedings has the right to be added as a party to protect their interests, ensuring equitable resolution in property disputes.
Purchasers of property in a partition suit may seek impleadment to assert equity; Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act permits their inclusion in ongoing litigation for effective adjudication.
The court ruled that transferees pendente lite are necessary parties in a partition suit for effective adjudication, subject to the outcome of the suit.
The right to intervene in ongoing execution proceedings is denied if the petitioner has no established interest in the property and the rights of prior parties have been conclusively determined.
A purchaser of undivided interest lacks locus standi in preliminary decree proceedings of a partition suit; rights must be asserted in final decree proceedings.
The court allows the impleadment of parties in partition suits when they provide sufficient evidence of ownership despite prior non-production of documents.
A subsequent transferee with a registered sale deed must be allowed to protect her interests in ongoing litigation, demonstrating both necessity and direct interest in the subject matter.
A party not seeking relief cannot be compelled to add a stranger to the suit, affirming the plaintiff's discretion in litigation under the Code of Civil Procedure.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
