Transferees pendente lite claiming title via a Will are proper parties under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC in a specific performance suit, as their presence is necessary for complete adjudication of title disputes despite the principle of dominus litis.

ORDER:

1. The present Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 04.07.2023 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District in I.A.No.335 of 2023 in O.S.No.137 of 2015.

2. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein have filed I.A.No.335 of 2023 in O.S.No.137 of 2015 to implead them in the suit as defendant Nos.6 and 7 being the successors of the suit schedule property and other properties from their grandmother [defendant No.1]. G.Narsimha Goud, who is one of the GPA holders of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein – petitioners sworn the affidavit and contended that the grandmother of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 – petitioners by name Jangam Marthamma w/o. late J.Rajaratnam was the absolute owner and possessor of the land bearing Survey No.341, admeasuring Ac.1-34 gts; Survey No.345 to an extent of Ac.1-27 gts, total admeasuring Ac.3-21 gts situated at Peddamangalaram Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. During her life time, she executed a registered will deed bearing document No.78/III/2019 dated 28.03.2019 bequeathing the above said land and other properties in favour of the respondents herein – petitioners. Jangam Marthamma (defendant No.1) expired on 06.07.2019 and thereafter, respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein - petitioners have succeeded to the above said lands and other properties by virtue of the will deed. On 10.04.2022, respondent No.1 – petitioner No.1 went to the office of the Tahsildar of Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District for the purpose of mutation of their names in respect of the above said properties and VRO, Peddamangalaram village advised them to make an application for mutation in Mee seva, on the same day, respondent No.1 - petitioner No.1 has obtained EC and he was shocked to know that Mohd.Mohiuddin, [proprietor of the plaintiff - petitioner herein] has created two registered sale deeds in respect of the properties to an extent of Ac.1-24 gts vide document No.1746/2008 dated 21.04.2008 for an extent of Ac.0-20 gts., in Survey Nos.341 and 345 and vide document No.1802 of 2008, dated 25.08.2008 for an extent of Ac.1-04 gts in Survey Nos.341 and 345. Basing on the sale deeds petitioner herein – plaintiff brought into existence several sale deeds in favour of third parties. Further, respondent No.1 – petitioner No.1 shocked to know that mutation application could not be received as the lands were put in prohibitory list on account of a Court order in the above suit. Respondent No.2-petitioner No.2 is in London and the respondent No.1-petitioner No.1 is preoccupied with his business, as such he is unable to look after the above said properties personally and they executed a GPA on 03.08.2022. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein - petitioners are proper and necessary parties to the suit and they may be brought on record as defendant Nos.6 and 7.

3. Petitioner herein - respondent No.1 in I.A.No.335 of 2023 filed counter and contended that they purchased total land admeasuring Ac.3-03 guntas from J.Marathamma, out of which, she has executed two registered sale deeds in part i.e., Ac.0-20 gts and Ac.1-04 gts vide two registered sale deed document Nos.1746/2008, dated 21.04.2008 and 1802/2008, dated 25.08.2008 in Survey Nos.341 and 345. J.Marthamma had signed two other sale deeds to an extent of Ac.0-39 guntas and Ac.0-20 guntas on 25.08.2008 but evaded to appear before the SRO having received entire sale consideration from Mohammad Mohiuddin. Therefore, he filed a suit for specific performance. J.Marathamma already filed wri