2 3 herein filed writ petition No.
Hence, the present appeals by way of special leave petitions.
Reason The facts of the case leading to these appeals in nutshell are as follows Respondent number.
The appellant herein purchaser who purchased the suit property during the pendency of the suit filed an application in the pending suit under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC for impleadment as a defendant in the suit.
2 3 herein the original plaintiffs filed a suit against respondent number1 herein original defendant number1 for specific performance of the agreement to sell companytract dated 3.5.2005 executed by respondent number1 original defendant number1 in the Court of learned 4th Additional District Judge, Bilaspur.
It was the case on behalf of the appellant herein that he has purchased the suit property and is a necessary and proper party to the suit as he has a direct interest in the suit property.
That thereafter the appellant preferred a review application which came to be dismissed.
856/2012 by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition preferred by the original plaintiffs and has quashed and set aside the order passed by the learned trial Court allowing the application preferred by the appellant herein for impleading him as a necessary party to the suit filed by respondent number.
169/2013 in Writ Petition No.
That by an order dated 5.11.2012, the learned trial Court allowed the said application and directed the original plaintiffs to join the appellant as a defendant in the suit.
2 3 herein, respondent number.
By the impugned judgment and order dated 3.7.2013, the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has quashed and set aside the order passed by the learned trial Court allowing the impleadment application preferred by the appellant herein by holding that as regards the relief claimed against the original defendants and as numberrelief has been claimed against the appellant herein, the appellant cannot be said to be a necessary or formal party.
2.1 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned trial Court dated 5.11.2012 allowing the application and permitting the appellant herein to be joined as a party defendant in the suit filed by the original plaintiffs respondent number.
That during the pendency of the aforesaid suit and despite the injunction against respondent number1 herein original defendant number1 original owner number to alienate or transfer the suit property, respondent number1 herein original defendant number1 executed a sale deed in favour of the appellant herein vide sale deed dated 10.07.2008.
2 3 herein the original plaintiffs, the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date 2019.07.25 130650 IST original applicant appellant has preferred the present appeals.
As discussed above, in the event any decree is passed against Respondents 2 and 3 and in favour of the appellant for specific performance of the companytract for sale in respect of the companytracted property, the decree that would be passed in the said suit, obviously, cannot bind Respondents 1 and 4 to 11.
856/2012 and order dated 5.8.2013 passed in Review Petition No.
R. SHAH , J. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 3.7.2013 passed in Writ Petition No.
