Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
Anurag Agrawal S/o Rajnikant Agrawal – Appellant
Versus
Kailash Yadav S/o Mishrilal Yadav – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. common question in multiple petitions. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments for impleadment of parties. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observations on party necessity. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. legal basis for remand of applications. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. order allowing petition without merit ruling. (Para 11 , 12) |
ORDER :
1. There being common question involved in all the three petitions viz. (M.P 5245/22 arising out of civil suit no. 122/17), (M.P. 5250/2022 arising out of civil suit no. 121/17) and (M.P. 5251/2022 arising out of civil suit no. 123/17), they are being decided by this common order.
2. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner/plaintiff challenging the order dated 28.10.2022 passed by 1st District Judge, Narmadapuram, in civil suit no.122-A/17, whereby applications under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC and Order 6 Rule 17 CPC filed by the plaintiff for impleadment of transferee purchasers and for amendment of plaint, have been dismissed. However, the other application under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC for taking the certified copies of the sale deeds executed by defendant-Harishankar, on record, has been allowed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
The plaintiff in a specific performance suit has the right to implead necessary parties with a direct nexus to the suit, even if they are subsequent transferees of the property in question.
The decision to allow subsequent purchasers as parties in specific performance suits is justified when they demonstrate a semblance of title or interest to the property, supporting effective judicial....
Lis pendens purchasers are not necessary or proper parties in a specific performance suit, as their absence does not impede the passing of an effective decree.
Agreement to Sell – There is no absolute proposition that whenever a suit for specific performance is filed, no third person can be impleaded as party to suit – In order to avoid multiplicity of proc....
The court ruled that third parties may be necessary in specific performance suits to avoid multiplicity of litigation, allowing their impleadment and amendment of the suit.
Only parties to a contract can be joined in a specific performance suit; others are neither necessary nor proper parties.
The court established that in specific performance cases, all parties with a direct interest must be included to ensure effective adjudication and uphold the doctrine of Us pendens.
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
