IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22810 of 2011 ====================================================== 1. Parmanand Prasad S/o Late Ram Sevak Prasad, R/o Mauza - Ahiyatpur, Post- Bhojpur, P.S.- Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda. 2. Sri Brahamdeo Prasad S/o Late Ram Sevak Prasad, R/o Mauza - Ahiyatpur, Post- Bhojpur, P.S.- Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda. 3. Sri Inderadeo Prasad S/o Late Ram Sevak Prasad, R/o Mauza - Ahiyatpur, Post- Bhojpur, P.S.- Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda. 4. Sharaban Prasad S/o Late Chhedi Prasad R/o Village- Moniampur, P.O.- Bhojpur, P.S.- Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda. .... .... Petitioners Versus 1. Kaushalia Devi, D/o Late Lal Bihari Gope, W/O Bali Ram Gope R/o Village- Moniampur, P.O.- Bhojpur, P.S.- Chandi (Nagarnausa), District- Nalanda 2. Bali Ram Gope S/O Late Daroga Gope R/o Village- Moniampur, P.O.- Bhojpur, P.S.- Chandi (Nagarnausa), District- Nalanda .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Om Prakash Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2. 23-12-2011 This Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the transferees pendete lite of the suit property against the order dated 19th September 2011 made by the learned Sub-Judge-II, Hilsa, Nalanda pending Title Suit No. 65 of 2001. In the pending Tile Suit No. 65 of 2011, the writ Patna High Court CWJC No.22810 of 2011 (2) dt.23-12-2011 2 / 3 2 petitioners filed application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for being impleaded as party-defendants. According to the petitioners they are the transferees of the some of the suit lands pendent lite. They are, therefore, necessary parties to the suit. Learned Sub-Judge has rejected the application on the ground that the interest of the petitioners is fairly taken care of by their vendors, the defendant nos. 3 and 26. In view of the said finding the learned Sub Judge has rejected the application. Feeling aggrieved the applicants have preferred this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution. Learned advocate Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha has appeared for the writ petitioners. He has submitted that the petitioners’ interest is vitally affected. The petitioners are, therefore, necessary parties to the suit. In support of his submission Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Dhurendhar Prasad Singh v. Jai Prakash University & Ors., (A.I.R. 2001 SC 2552), particularly paragraph 25 thereof. The said judgment deals with the application made under Order 22 Rule 10 in respect of devolution of interest pending the suit. In my opinion the said judgment has no applicability to the facts of the present case. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha has also relied upon the judgment of this Court in the matter of Gauri Shankar Pathak & Ors. v. Dr. Shankaranand Upadhyay & Ors., (A.I.R. 2011 Patna 66). The learned single Judge has held that the transferees pendente lite can be impleaded in the pending suit to enable them to protect their interest. Undoubtedly, the Court has discretion to impleade the transferees pendent lite. Patna High Court CWJC No.22810 of 2011 (2) dt.23-12-2011 3 / 3 3 In the instant case the learned Sub Judge has recorded that the trial has already begun. The plaintiffs have examined their witnesses and that the transferees are bound by the outcome of the suit. I agree with the view expressed by the court below. The Petition is dismissed in limine. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ)