PANKAJ MITHAL
PHULGEN – Appellant
Versus
VINAY KUMAR TIWARI – Respondent
Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, I am to consider the right of the plaintiff/respondent to seek impleadment of subsequent purchasers, to be precise of transferee pendente lite as defendants in a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell and the consequential amendment thereto in the plaint.
2. The facts of the case in a capsule form are as under:
3. The plaintiff/respondent instituted Original Suit No. 466 of 2009 on 28.5.2009 for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 29.1.1991. The defendant/petitioners in the said suit filed their written statement on 30.8.2010 so as to contest the same and in one of the paragraphs of the written statement they pleaded that the property has been transferred by them on 12.4.2010 and 13.4.2010 by two sale-deeds in favour of Smt. Sheela Devi, Anita Gupta, Sangita Gupta, Krishnawati Devi, Anil Kumar and Dinesh Singh.
4. In view of the pleadings in the written statement, plaintiff/respondent moved application for impleadment of the aforesaid subsequent purchasers and for consequential amendment of the plaint seeking declaration of the aforesaid two sale-dee
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.