In a suit for specific performance, a third party asserting a fair semblance of title or interest in the suit property may be impleaded as a proper party under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, even if they are not a party to the contract.

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to The above named petitioner begs to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition to this Honble Court, against the Order dated 18.06.2025 in IA No. 1314 of 2025 in OS No.201 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam.

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in O.S.No.201/2024 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam.

IA NO: 2 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the operation of orders Dt. 18-06-2025 in IA.No.1314/2025 in in OS.No.201 of 2024, on the file of the Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam, pending disposal of the above revision petition in the interest of justice.

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. G RAMA GOPAL

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. G V S MEHAR KUMAR

2. BANDA SAI SAMPATH KUMAR

ORDER

1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed questioning the legality and correctness of the order dated 18.06.2025 passed in I.A.No.1314 of 2025 in O.S.No.201 of 2024 by the learned Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam.

2. The petitioner is respondent no.1/plaintiff, respondent no.1 is the petitioner/third party and respondent no.2 is the respondent no.2/defendant in I.A.No. 1314 of 2025 in O.S.No.201 of 2024 on the file of the Court of the learned Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam.

3. In the suit filed by the Revision Petitioner in O.S.No.201 of 2024 for specific performance of agreement of sale against respondent no.2/ defendant, the respondent no.1/third party to the suit filed petition vide I.A.No.1314 of 2025 under Order-1, Rule-10 of Code of Civil Procedure seeking permission of this Court to come on record as defendant no.2, contending that he is the absolute owner of the property covered under the specific performance suit and the defendant has no right and title over the plaint schedule property, which originally was purchased by maternal grandmother of respondent no.1 under registered sale deed and later executed Will bequeathing the said property to respondent no.1. The plaintiff resisted the said claim by filing counter contending that respondent no.1 being a third party to the suit contract of sale, cannot be permitted to come on record, since the same would alter the character and scope of the present suit and he is neither a necessary nor a proper party for specific performance suit. The learned trial Judge, upon hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the material available on record, allowed the petition. The said order has been assailed in this Civil Revision Petition.

4. Heard Sri G.Rama Gopal, learned counsel for the revision petitioner/ plaintiff, Sri G.V.S.Mehar Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.1/third party/proposed defendant no.2 and Sri B.Sai Sampath Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.2/defendant no.2.

5. Sri G.Ram Goal, learned counsel for the revision petitioner while reiterating the contents of the counter filed before the trial Court and grounds of revision petition would contend that the petitioner being a third party to the agreement to sell is neither a necessary nor a proper party to the suit for specific performance. He would further contend