Sushila Shantaram Kakade And Ors vs Ramchandra Genu Mule And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 11044 Bom

2023:BHC-AS:32091
                                                                                           40-wp2737-2023.doc


                             VRJ
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                                    WRIT PETITION NO.2737 OF 2023


                             Sushila Shantaram Kakade & Ors.                ... Petitioners
               Digitally
               signed by
               VAIBHAV
        VAIBHAV RAMESH
                                        V/s.
        RAMESH JADHAV
        JADHAV Date:
               2023.10.25
               18:53:18
               +0530
                             Ramchandra Genu Mule & Ors.                    ... Respondents


                             Mr. Drupad S. Patil for the petitioners.
                             Mr. Vaibhav V. Ugle for the respondent.



                                                             CORAM    : AMIT BORKAR, J.

                                                             DATED    : OCTOBER 25, 2023
                             P.C.:

1. The petitioners-original plaintiffs in a suit for partition and separate possession are challenging order passed by the Trial Court allowing application of subsequent purchasers to joint themselves as defendants in the suit.

2. It is not in dispute that the subsequent purchasers have purchased some of the suit properties during pendency of the suit. They, therefore, filed an application for impleading them as defendants in the suit.

3. In view of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Thomson Press (India) Ltd. vs. Nanak Builders & Investors (P) Ltd. reported in (2013) 5 SCC 397 and Khemchand Shankar Choudhary and Another vs. Vishnu Hari Patil and Others reported

40-wp2737-2023.doc

in 1983 (1) SCC 18, it is no longer res integra that the subsequent purchasers in a suit for partition stands in the shoes of transferees pendente lite. It is observed that there application needs to be considered as if they are legal heir or legatee during pendency of suit.

4. Hence, in my opinion, the impugned order does not suffer from any legal infirmity. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs.

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)