1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4518/2009 MANIKRAO R. SONWANE VS. REKHA R.BHILLAMAND OTHERS Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr.N.S.Deshpande, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Kathane, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 7. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 15, 2010. Heard. The petitioner has filed Special Civil Suit No.19/2000 for specific performance against deceased Dharmaji. He expired on 28.1.2008 and thereafter the present respondents, his L.Rs, were brought on record. On 1.9.2008 they sold some part of the suit property to third parties and the petitioner/plaintiff wanted to bring that event on record. By impugned order passed below Exh. 154 on 13.6.2009, that application has been rejected on the ground that the sale is not in dispute and it is governed by lis- pendence. Advocate Deshpande argues that as part of suit property has been sold and third party interest has been created, in order to have proper and effective decree, the fact of sale needed to be placed on record. Advocate Kathane on the other hand argues that the land sold is not form the suit property at all and the petitioner/plaintiff is unnecessarily bringing that land into 2 dispute. He invites attention to the order of Tahsildar dated 14th August, 2008 to point out how mutation in respect of part of land has been allowed by that authority. It is apparent that at this stage it is not possible to go into the merits of the controversy. The contention that out of the suit property, some property has already been sold needs to be taken on record, so as to adjudicate the controversy completely and finally between the parties. The reasons given by the Court below on 13.6.2009 are unsustainable. The impugned order is, therefore, quashed and set aside. The application moved by the petitioner/plaintiff is allowed. Necessary amendment be carried out by 2nd March, 2010. If the amendment is so carried out, opportunity to the respondents to carry out consequential amendment, if any, thereafter. Rule accordingly. No costs. JUDGE Rvjalit.