THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CRP No. 1091 of 2010 DATE: 22.07.2011 BETWEEN: Venkateswara Housing Pvt Ltd petitioner And Gorijala Padmaja and ors Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri K Jayakumar Counsel for the respondents: The Court made the following order: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CRP No. 1091 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner herein is plaintiff. The present revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the order dated 6.11.2009 in I.A. No. 553 of 2009 in O.S. No. 142 of 2007 on the file of the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, (FTC) Guntur, dismissing an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC to implead the District Registrar, Registrar office, Guntur and the Commissioner, Guntur Municipal Corporation, Guntur as proposed defendants 5 and 6. The plaintiff-petitioner herein filed a suit in O.S No. 142 of 2007 on the file of the V Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Guntur against the respondents for declaration that the sale deed dated 27.12.2003 executed by first defendant in favour of defendants 2 and 3 and registered as document No. 12329 of 2003 is null and void and not binding on the plaintiff and is liable to be set aside. In the said suit, the petitioner filed the present application to implead the District Registrar, Registrar office, Guntur and the Commissioner, Guntur Municipal Corporation, Guntur as proposed defendants 5 and 6 on an apprehension that if they are not parties to the suit proceedings, in the event of the plaintiff obtaining a decree, the respondents may obstruct the execution. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and perused the material available on record. The Court below on consideration of the matter, rightly dismissed the application on the ground that absence of the proposed parties cannot have any impact in the adjudication of the dispute and the apprehension of the petitioner that the proposed parties may obstruct the execution of the decree, cannot be a ground to implead them as parties. The said order cannot be said to be illegal warranting interference of this Court. There are no merits in the revision, accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs. ______________ V ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 22.7.2011 TVK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CRP No. 1091 of 2010 date: 22.7.2011