JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.

The instant petition is directed against the order dated 28.5.2019, whereby the trial court has granted leave to respondent no. 7, to be arrayed as a party defendant, being assignee of the interest of defendants 1, 2, 3 and 4, during pendency of the partition suit. The petitioner has also challenged the order of revisional court dated 1.7.2019, dismissing the revision as not maintainable.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent no. 7, who has been granted leave to contest the suit, is not a necessary and proper party. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on a recent judgment of Supreme Court in Gurmit Singh Bhatia vs. Kiran Kant Robinson and others, 2019 SCCOnlineSC 912.

3. The suit instituted by the plaintiff-petitioner is for partition of a building, bearing Municipal No. 638. Defendants 3 and 4 in their written statement, categorically took the plea that they had sold their undivided share to respondent no. 7 by sale deed dated 21.10.2014. The execution of sale deed dated 5.9.2014 by defendants 1 and 2 in respect of their share, in favour of respondent no. 7, is also not in dispute. Order 22 Rule 10 CPC empower