Allahabad High Court
Agra Development Authority Agra vs Anirudh Vir Singh on 26 July, 2012
Bench: Prakash Krishna, Virendra Vikram Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 34
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 177 of 1997
Petitioner :- Agra Development Authority Agra
Respondent :- Anirudh Vir Singh
Petitioner Counsel :- Satish Chaturvedi
Respondent Counsel :- A.K.Gupta,P.C.Jain,Ravikant.
Hon'ble Prakash Krishna,J.
Hon'ble Virendra Vikram Singh,J.
Ref: Civil Misc. Transposition Application No. 186169 of 2011
Heard Sri P.C. Jain in support of the transposition application and Sri A.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent.
This is an application on behalf of the respondents no. 2 and 3- Sudip Potdar, Pradeep Potdar, for their transposition as appellants no. 2 and 3 in the array of parties.
The facts may be noticed in brief:
Agra Development Authority put the plot in question for auction. The auction was held on 15th December, 1993. Plaintiff Anirudh Vir Singh was the highest bidder. However, the said auction was not confirmed and the plot was again put to auction. In second auction which took place on 23rd December, 1993, the applicants herein namely, Sudip Potdar and Pradeep Potdar were the highest bidder who offered Rs.7,80,000/- for the said plot. Plaintiff also participated in second auction and his highest bid was Rs.7,50,000/-. The bid of the applicants herein was accepted and the auction was settled in their favour. However the plaintiff instituted the suit being Suit No. 130 of 1994 giving rise to the present appeal for injuction directing the Agra Development Authority to accept the plaintiff's bid and complete the transaction. In the said suit, the applicants herein were not impleaded as parties and the suit was decreed on 25th January, 1997. Hence, the present appeal at the instance of Agra Development Authority. The present applicants have also been impleaed as respondents no. 2 and 3. The case of the applicants for their transposition as appellants is that they are necessary and proper party and have stood in the shoes of Agra Development Authority as the auction has been settled in their favour. Reliance has been place upon the decision of Apex Court in the case of Smt. Saila Bala Dassi v. Nirmala Sundari Dassi and another, 1958 AIR 394.
Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that the present applicants are neither necessary nor proper party as they were not impleaded in the suit.
Considered the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
It is not in dispute that in the second auction, the present applicants were the highest bidder and whose bid has been accepted and the auction has been settled in their favour. They have stood in the shoes of Agra Development Authority and it is desirable to permit them to prosecute the appeal.
The application for transposition is, therefore, allowed.
Respondents no. 2 and 3 are hereby transposed as appellants no. 2 and 3.
List this appeal in the next cause list under the heading "for hearing" showing the name of Sri P.C. Jain as counsel for the appellant.
(Virendra Vikram Singh,J) (Prakash Krishna,J)
Order Date :- 26.7.2012
MK/
