##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:14778]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6678/2026

1. Jaynarain S/o Surjaram, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Dabikalan (Chak 12 D.b.l.) Jandawali, Tehsil Tibbi, District

Hanumangarh(Raj.)

2. Pramod S/o Jaynarain, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Dabikalan (Chak 12 D.b.l.) Jandawali, Tehsil Tibbi, District

Hanumangarh,(Raj.)

----Petitioners Versus

Banwarilal S/o Rajaram, R/o Chak 4 A.m., Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh,(Raj.)

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Divik Mathur For Respondent(s) : --

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

01/04/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed aggrieved of order dated 16.02.2026 passed by District Judge, Hanumangarh (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned Trial Court') in Civil Case No.14/2020 whereby application under Order 6 Rule 17 r.w. Order 1 Rule 10, CPC r.w. Order 20 Rule 12 of General Rules (Civil and

Criminal), 2018, stood allowed.

2. Vide the above application, it was averred by the plaintiff that during the pendency of the suit, gift deed dated 22.05.2024 came to be executed by defendant No.2 in favour of his son defendant No.4. The same was done with an intent to frustrate the agreement to sell qua which the present suit for specific performance was filed. Further, by virtue of the said gift deed,

(Uploaded on 03/04/2026 at 05:58:16 PM)

(Downloaded on 04/04/2026 at 10:12:01 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:14778] (2 of 3) [CW-6678/2026] even the mutation entries have been made in the revenue record. Therefore, the amendment in the plaint as prayed for and the

impleadment of defendant Nos. 3 and 4 was essential.

3. The learned Trial Court, while allowing the application, observed that although the subsequent transferee/purchaser would be bound by the principle of lis pendens in terms of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 but then, a defence can be raised by the subsequent purchaser/transferee that he was not aware of the pendency of the suit and is a bonafide transferee. In that event, the said transferee/purchaser being an essential party

deserves to be impleaded.

4. Heard the Counsel. Perused the record.

5. This Court is in consonance with the findings as recorded by the learned Trial Court. It is evident that during the pendency of the suit, the property in question has been sought to be transferred by defendant No.2. The mutation entries having been made in favour of the transferee, he becomes a ‘recorded khatedar’. Having a gift deed in his favour and being a recorded khatedar, the transferee definitely becomes entitled to

alienate/transfer the property further.

6. As held by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Khemchand Shankar Choudhary Vs. Vishnu Hari Patil; (1983) 1 SCC 18, the position of a person on whom any interest has devolved on account of transfer during the pendency of the suit or proceeding, is somewhat similar to the position of an heir or a legatee of a

party who dies during the pendency of a suit or a proceeding.

7. As is the settled position of law, during the pendency of a civil litigation involving any property, the endevour of the Courts

(Uploaded on 03/04/2026 at 05:58:16 PM)

(Downloaded on 04/04/2026 at 10:12:01 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:14778] (3 of 3) [CW-6678/2026] must be to prevent its threatened wastage, damage and alienation by any party thereto, which might lead to the immeasurable prejudice to the other side or might render the situation irreversible not only to impact upon the ultimate decision but also to render the relief granted, as illusionary. (Thomson Press (India) Ltd. Vs. Nanak Builders & Investors (P) Ltd.; 2013

(5) SCC 397)

8. In view of the above settled position of law, this Court is of the clear opinion that the transferee in question who happens to be the son of the transferor, deserves to be impleaded as party defendant and for the same reasons, the plaint deserves to be permitted to be amended incorporating the subsequent event and the consequential relief. The learned Trial Court rightly a