THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3972 OF 2008 Dated 18-06-2010 Between: Smt. Marupalli Sattiyyama (died) and others ... PETITIONERS Vs. 1. Sri Peerupalli Satyam, S/o.Polayya & another ...RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CRP NO.3972 OF 2008 ORDER: This civil revision petition is filed against the order dated 16-7-2008 passed in IA No.188 of 2008 in OS No.164 of 1998 by the Junior Civil Judge, Bheemunipatnam, dismissing the IA filed under Order 1, Rule 10 CPC to implead the proposed party as 2nd defendant. 2. The petitioners herein are plaintiffs in the suit and the suit was filed for declaration of title over the suit schedule property. The petitioners after the sole defendant-respondent herein filed written statement to the effect that one Mr. Konada Ramana (proposed party) purchased the suit property from defendant under a registered sale deed in the year 1986 and since then he has been in possession of the suit property, the petitioners sought to file the present IA to implead him, which was dismissed by the trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners-plaintiffs contended that the trial Court erred in dismissing the application inasmuch as the said third party was stated to have purchased the suit property and therefore proper and necessary party. Learned counsel also stated that a party can be added to the proceedings at any stage of the proceedings if the said party’s presence before the Court is necessary to effectively and completely adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents contended that as the petitioners have failed to take steps to the implead the proposed party at the earliest point of time, the trial Court rightly dismissed the IA. 4. As a rule the transferee of a suit property pending proceedings of the suit cannot be joined as of right but the Court has discretion to do so. The transferee can be joined as a proper party if his interest in the subject matter of suit is substantial and not just peripheral. However, impleading a party cannot solely depend on whether he has an interest in the suit property, but the question is whether the right of a person would be affected if he is not joined as a party. Order 1, Rule 10 CPC enables the Court to add any person as a party at any stage of the proceedings, if the person whose presence before the Court is necessary in order to enable the Court to effectively and completely adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit. In addition to this, avoidance of multiplicity of proceedings is also one of the facets of the said provision. 5. In the circumstances, the civil revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. No costs. ____________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J Dated 18-6-2010 Nrg.