Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Yogesh s/o Balaji Misar, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 20-11-2012 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Bramhapuri, in Regular Civil Suit No.59 of 2010. The trial court had rejected the petitioner's application (Exhibit 37) under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) seeking to be joined as a plaintiff in the suit. The suit was originally filed by the respondents (Keshav Vistari Sontakke and others) claiming ownership of the suit property. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner purchased the suit property by a registered sale deed dated 26-7-2011. The trial court held that the transfer during the pendency of the suit was hit by the principle of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and therefore the petitioner's presence was not necessary for effective adjudication. The High Court, in its oral judgment dated 18-1-2014, allowed the writ petition. The court observed that merely because the transfer is subject to lis pendens, it does not bar the court from exercising its power under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC to add a subsequent purchaser as a plaintiff. The petitioner claimed to have stepped into the shoes of the plaintiffs and needed an opportunity to prosecute the suit. The court held that the trial court erred in rejecting the application and set aside the impugned order, directing the trial court to allow the petitioner to be joined as a plaintiff.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Joinder of Parties - Order I Rule 10(2) CPC - Lis Pendens - The court considered whether a subsequent purchaser of suit property during pendency of suit can be added as a plaintiff under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC despite the transfer being hit by the principle of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Held that the principle of lis pendens does not operate as a bar to the court's power under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC to add a subsequent purchaser as a party if his presence is necessary for effective and complete adjudication of all questions involved in the suit (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a subsequent purchaser of suit property during pendency of suit can be added as a plaintiff under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC despite the transfer being hit by the principle of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. Impugned order dated 20-11-2012 set aside. Trial court directed to allow the petitioner to be joined as plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No.59 of 2010.
Law Points
- Lis pendens does not bar joinder of subsequent purchaser under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC
- Transfer pendente lite is subject to lis pendens but does not preclude addition of party for effective adjudication
