Radheshyam vs Public At Large
2022 Latest Caselaw 16556 MP

                                                                               1
                                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                                       MA No. 1723 of 2017
                                                               (RADHESHYAM Vs PUBLIC AT LARGE AND OTHERS)

                                       Dated : 13-12-2022
                                                Shri Pushpendra Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

                                                Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Advocate for the respondent.

Heard on I.A. No.4954/2020, an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC seeking impleadment of subsequent purchasers.

Shri Pushpendra Yadav placing reliance on the judgment of Supreme

Court in case of Sunil Gupta Vs. Kiran Girhotra and Others, (2007) 8 SCC 506 submits that such application cannot be allowed. A transferee has no interest in the probate proceedings.

In view of said judgment of Sunil Gupta (supra) wherein Supreme Court has held that a probate can be granted only to an executor appointed by the Will. A transferee of a property during the pendency of a proceeding is not a necessary party.

In view of such decision, application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC is dismissed.

At this stage, Shri Yadav submits that he is not prepare with the case for final hearing.

On his request, list this case in the week commencing 16.01.2023. Interim relief, if any, to continue till the next date of hearing.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN Date: 2022.12.13 17:55:32 IST Tabish