IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4726 OF 2010 Date: 24-11-2011 BETWEEN: Chilakalapudi Radha Krishan Rao and others …. Petitioners AND Chilakalapudi Surendranath Tagore and others …. Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4726 OF 2010 JUDGMENT: The petitioners are defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 4 in O.S No.415 of 2004 pending before the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore. The 1st respondent - plaintiﬀ had ﬁled the suit for partition of the plaint schedule properties. During the pendency of the suit, the present petitioners ﬁled an application for impleadment of the 6th respondent herein, namely, Kurapati Panduranga Rao, as 8th defendant in the suit. The 1st petitioner ﬁled counter in the said application, wherein he admitted that he has no objection for impleadment of the 6th respondent. Despite the aforementioned admission of the 1st respondent, the trial Court dismissed the application. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as the 6th respondent has purchased a part of the scheduled property, he is a necessary party to the litigation. 3. No one is put in appearance on behalf of the respondents, despite service. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the considered opinion that as the 6th respondent has purchased a part of the schedule property, it would be necessary to implead him. Before any partition is effected, the 6th respondent would have to be heard. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the order, dated 04-10-2010. The 6th respondent herein is impleaded as 8th defendant in O.S.No.415 of 2007. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J November 24, 2011. KT L