- (1.) Rule. Shri Joshi, learned counsel waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent no.4.
(2.) The present petition has been preferred against the order dated 21st September, 2006 below Exh.38 passed by the learned 8TH Additional Senior Civil Judge, Surat in Regular Civil Suit No.75 of 2004 whereby an application preferred by the original plaintiffs for joining purchaser of the ancestral property was not allowed by the Trial Court against which the present petition has been preferred.
(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as for respondent no.4 and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby quash and set aside the order passed by the Trial Court dated 21st September, 2006 below Exh.38 in Regular Civil Suit No.75 of 2004 mainly for the following facts and reasons:- It appears, from the facts of the case, that the petitioners are the original plaintiffs who preferred Regular Civil Suit No.75 of 2004 for partition of the ancestral property. The impugned property i.e. Final Plot No.5/D, has been purchased from original defendant no.1 by the proposed defendant i.e. present respondent no.4. The property is an ancestral property, as per the order passed by Trial Court as per Para:5 of an impugned order. The original plaintiffs are claiming partition of the said property along with other properties. The present respondent no.4 has purchased the property from original defendant no.1 on 9th August, 2002. This fact was not known to the original plaintiffs and, therefore, suit was instituted in the year 2004 without joining respondent no.4 as a party-original defendants. Therefore, an application below Exh.38 was given, no sooner did, original plaintiff came to know that one of the ancestral properties was sold away by original defendant no.1 to the present respondent no.4.;