IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 23.11.2010 C.R.No.7657 of 2010 (O&M) Lt. Col. Hakam Singh (Retd.) ...Petitioner Versus Amarjit Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr. Viney Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral) One of the plaintiffs is in revision aggrieved against an order passed by the learned first Appellate Court on 30.09.2010, whereby an application filed by the vendees pursuant to the sale deeds 30.12.2005, 31.01.2006 & 03.07.2007 was allowed and the applicants were permitted to file appeal against the judgment and decree dated 08.05.2010. The learned first Appellate Court has found that since the judgment and decree has the effect of setting aside of the sale deeds in favour of the vendees, therefore, the applicants were permitted to file an appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the vendees are none else, but sons of plaintiff No.2 Sewa Singh and, therefore, they were aware of the pendency of the proceedings, but having not contesting the suit, cannot be permitted to file appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court. It may be noticed that the vendees are the purchasers from defendant No.2 Paramjit Singh being attorney of Niranjan Singh, Swaran C.R.No.7657 of 2010 (O&M) Kaur, Gurdeep Kaur and also the heirs of Gian Singh. Even if the transfer was during the pendency of the suit, but the applicants are entitled to file appeal against the judgment and decree, as such judgment has the effect of setting aside the sale in their favour. I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the learned first Appellate Court in permitting the applicants to file appeal against the judgment and decree, which has the effect of setting aside the sale in their favour. Even if the sale in favour of the applicants is during the pendency of the suit, still the vendees have a right to protect their interest on the grounds which may be available to their vendors. Therefore, the vendees have a right to challenge the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court. Consequently, I do not find any ground for interference in the order passed by the learned first Appellate Court. Dismissed. 23.11.2010 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE 2