Shri Pappu Saxena vs Shri Budhsagar Since Deceased And 30 ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 10385 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Shri Pappu Saxena vs Shri Budhsagar Since Deceased And 30 ... on 10 September, 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:159727
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 8559 of 2017   
 
   Shri Pappu Saxena    
 
  .....Petitioner(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   Shri Budhsagar Since Deceased And 30 Others    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Petitioner(s)   
 
:   
 
Rishi Chadha   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
Mohammad Aon   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 9
 
   
 
 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.      

1. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 01.08.2017, by which, an application filed by the plaintiff-respondent no.6/1 for transposition as appellant in the appeal has been rejected by the Additional District Judge, Court No.11, Aligarh in Civil Appeal No.88 of 2014.

2. Original suit No.265 of 1989 was filed by Smt. Kiran Devi and 2 others against the defendant-respondents for cancellation of sale deed dated 27.12.1982. The other co-plaintiff in the suit one Tota Ram- plaintiff no.2, who was disable and therefore, filed suit through plaintiff no.1 and one Yashpal Singh s/o Sugharh Singh, plaintiff no.3. The said suit was dismissed by judgment and decree dated 06.05.2014. Against the judgment and decree dated 06.05.2014, Civil Appeal No.88 of 2014 was filed by the plaintiff no.3. In the memo of appeal, it was stated by the appellant as plaintiff no.1, Smt. Kiran is not available, therefore, she has been added as respondent no.6 in the appeal and plaintiff no.2 has died during pendency of the appeal. After the death of Smt. Kiran Devi, his son, the present petitioner was impleaded as respondent no.6/1. Respondent no.6/1/petitioner moved an application that he may be transposed as appellant in the suit. The original appellant i.e. respondent no.8 has not filed any objection to the said application nor the defendants-respondents in the appeal has filed any objection. The application filed by the petitioner was rejected by the trial court on the ground that there is no justification for transposition of the petitioner as appellant in the appeal and the petitioner may also put his case in appeal as respondent.

2. In my view, there is no impediment, in case, the defendant, who was not available at the time of filing an appeal, to be transposed as appellant especially when the other appellant or the defendants has no objection to the same. Therefore, the order dated 01.08.2017 is set aside. The writ petition is allowed.

3. The petitioner is permitted to be impleaded as appellant no.2 in the suit. Necessary correction may be made within a month.

4. Since, the appeal is of the year 2014, it would be appropriate that the appeal may be considered and decided expeditiously preferably within a period of one year after hearing all the parties concerned.

(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)

September 10, 2025

Priya