IMPORTANT POINT
Where there was a devolution of interest during pendency of suit, under Order XXII. Rule 10, CPC, suit may, by leave of Court be continued by or against transferee.

Ram Chand Gupta, J.—The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 115 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘the Code’) for quashing/setting aside order dated 9.4.2010, Annexure P12, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide which application filed by Janmeja Singh, respondent No.1 under Order 1, Rule 10 and Order XXII, Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code was allowed by accepting the appeal filed by him.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned appellate Court.

3. Facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that Gurkesh Singh (predecessor in interest of petitioners No.6 to 8) and others filed a suit for declaration that they are sole owners in actual and cultivating possession of the suit land and challenged the impugned order dated 15.12.1993 passed in Missal No DDDP (II) 525 dated 14.8.1989, titled as Mewa Singh v. Gram Panchayat Deeva Ganduan and impugned order of review dated 28.1.1994 and has also challenged the mutation and the revenue entries on the basis of aforesaid order and also challenged order dated 24.10.2002 in Missal No. D.D.D.P. (Il) 516 dated 14.8.1989 passed by the Deputy Additional Director Panchayats, Patiala, in exercising powers of Collector under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, (for short ‘the Act 1961’) alongwith relief of permanent injunction against respondent/defendant Mewa Singh. Notice of the suit was given to respondent Mewa Singh, who appeared and filed written statement.

4. The case was at the initial stage when an application was moved by respondent/applicant Janmeja Singh, for impleading him as a party in the suit under Order 1, Rule 10 and under Order XXII, Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code on the plea that he had purchased property in dispute from Mewa Singh vide sale deed 3.10.2006 during pendency of the suit and he has acquired the interest in the property in dispute and hence, he is a necessary party to be impleaded. Application was dismissed by learned trial Court and, however, on appeal filed by respondent/applicant Janmeja Singh, the same was accepted by learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide impugned order dated 9.4.2010, while setting aside order of trial Court dated 1.8.2007. He was allowed to join the proceedings and defend the case.

5. It bas been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs that subsequent vendee during the pendency of the suit without permission of the Court is not a necessary party to be impleaded in the suit as transfer of the property in dispute during pendency of the suit is hit by doctrine of lis pendence. Hence, it is contended that learned first Appellate Court has committed illegality in allowing the application filed by respondent/applicant Janmeja Singh for impleading him as a party in the proceedings. He has placed reliance upon Sarvinder Singh v. Dalip Singh& Ors. 1997 (Suppl.) Civil Court Cases 50 (SC) and Sanjay Verma v. Manik Roy & Ors. 2007(1) Civil Court Cases 401 (SC)

6. On the other hand, it has been contended by learned counsel for the contesting respondent/applicant Janmeja Singh that he has acquired the right in the property in dispute during pendency of the suit and that Mewa Singh, his vendor, has lost interest in the suit and rather he has been proceeded ex parte and is not contesting the suit. It has further been contended that contesting respondent/applicant intends to contest the suit on the same grounds on which written statement has been filed by Mewa Singh, the original defendant and that he does not want to take any other fresh plea. It is further contended that in case he is not allowed to defend the case by substituting himself in place of Mewa Singh, who has stopped contesting the suit, it would amount to decree