P. Mandal, J. - (1.) This application is at the instance of the plaintiffs and is directed against the order No. 27 dated March 27, 2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Second Court, Barasat in Title Suit No. 210 of 2008 thereby allowing an application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) The plaintiffs filed the Title Suit No. 252 of 2009 (subsequently renumbered) for specific performance of contract against the opposite party Nos. 3 to 5. In that suit, the defendants appeared. The plaintiffs filed an application for temporary injunction and the learned Trial Judge granted an order of status quo upon both the parties. Being aggrieved, the plaintiffs filed an appeal before this Hon'ble Court. That appeal being numbered F.M.A.T. No. 77 of 2008 was disposed of by a Division Bench of the Hon'ble Court observing that the suit having already been filed any transfer made during the pendency of the suit will be hit by the doctrine of lis pendens and that if the defendants want to transfer the property to a third party, they must disclose in the sale deed that such transfer will abide by the decision of the main suit after giving the number of the suit. The opposite party Nos. 1 & 2 filed an application for addition of parties in the said suit and that application was allowed by the learned Trail judge by the impugned order holding that those persons were required to be added as parties to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit. Being aggrieved by the said order, the plaintiffs have come up with this application.
(3.) Now the point of consideration in this application is whether the learned Trial Judge was justified in allowing those two persons as parties to the suit filed by the plaintiffs.;