1. The Revision Petitioner/Plaintiff has projected the instant Civil Revision Petition as against the order dated 13.11.2009 in I.A. No.877 of 2009 in O.S. No.118 of 2009 passed by the learned Additional District Munsif, Cuddalore.

2. The learned Additional District Munsif, Cuddalore, while passing order in I.A. No.877 of 2009 in O.S. No.118 of 2009 on 13.11.2009 (filed by the Revision Petitioner/Plaintiff) has inter alia observed that. 'it is settled law that the subsequent purchaser need not be impleaded in the pending proceedings and that the subsequent transaction is invalid under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act' and resultantly dismissed the Application without costs.

3. According to the learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner/Plaintiff, the Trial Court has failed to appreciate that impleading the purchaser will avoid multiplicity or proceedings and also shorten the litigation.

4. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Plaintiff that the agreement of sale is an ante-dated one and the purchaser claims right under the same.

5. Finally, it is the contention of the learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner/ Plaintiff that it is