S.K.KESHOTE - (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) Under the impugned order dated 1-9-1999 of 3rd Jt. Civil Judge (S.D) Surat in Sp. Civil Suit NO. 274/98 below Ex.44 the prayer made by the plaintiff petitioners for impleading the respondent NO. 12 and 13 as defendants in the suit came to be rejected.
(3.) The facts of the case, in brief are that the plaintiff - petitioner No.1 filed the suit against the defendants No. 1 to 11 for her share in the property left by her late husband. It is the case of the plaintiff petitioners that her late husband's father was the owner of the suit property and he has not given this suit property to anybody else. The defendants -respondents No. 1 to 11 denied her share in the suit land which give cause her to file the suit. The defendants - respondents No. 1 to 11 on 20-3-99 sold the disputed suit property to the proposed defendants NO.12 and 13. She filed the application Ex. 44 praying therein for their impleadment as defendant in the suit. The notice of this application was given to the proposed defendants. The have not disputed that they have purchased the suit property pending litigation. In their reply, they have agreed that they are bound by the outcome of the suit. The learned counsel for the proposed defendants - respondents No. 12 and 13 raised the objection that they are not necessary party since they purchased the suit land from the defendants No. 1 to 11 and they are bound by the outcome of the suit.;