- (1.) This petition is filed against the the order dated 12.05.2014 by which an application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (here-in-after referred to as the "CPC") for impleading her as a party in the suit, has been dismissed.
(2.) The facts, as narrated before me, are that one Hari Mitter was the owner of the property in dispute. He sold it to Sh. S.K.Sharma on 04.01.2005. The plaintiff-respondent no.1 filed the suit for declaration that she is the owner of the property in dispute in view of the sale deed executed by the GPA of Hari Mitter, but before the suit could have been filed on 10.05.2008, S.K.Sharma sold the property in dispute to Madhu Bala on 30.04.2008, who further sold it to Pushpa Rani (petitioner herein) on 28.05.2013 who has now sold it to another Pushpa Devi wife of Raja Ram during the pendency of the present revision petition.
(3.) It may be highlighted that notice of motion was issued in this petition on 26.05.2014 with the following observations:- "It is contended that the respondent no.1/plaintiff in a suit for declaration challenging the sale deed executed by original owner in favour of defendant no.1, the applicant has purchased the suit property vide registered sale deed and therefore acquired a right to be impleaded in order to protect her interest. In support, he cites judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Thomson Press (India) Ltd. Vs. Nanak Builders & Investors P. Ltd. and others, 2013 2 CivCC 694.";