Pruthvirajsinh N. Jadeja (D) By LRs. v. Jayeshkumar Chhakaddas Shah
Background
A landowner's power-of-attorney holder allegedly sold disputed land to the appellants' predecessor, which the landowner challenged in a civil suit, denying that any such sale power existed. While that suit was pending, the landowner separately sold the same land to a third person (the respondent) for Rs. 10 lakhs, who then sought to be added as a co-plaintiff in the ongoing suit. Shortly after that application was filed, the landowner's heirs struck a settlement with the appellants and tried to withdraw the suit entirely, and the trial court dismissed the respondent's impleadment request, prompting him to approach the High Court, which ruled in his favour.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that although the respondent had wrongly cited Order I Rule 10 CPC instead of the applicable Order XXII Rule 10 CPC (dealing with assignment of interest during a pending suit), this technical mislabelling was not fatal since the power to pass the order existed regardless. As the assignee of the original plaintiff's rights through a registered sale deed, the respondent had a vital interest in the outcome of the suit and was entitled to continue it, especially since the subsequent "settlement" between the heirs and the appellants transferred no actual title or payment and could not extinguish his rights. The Court held that the heirs' later withdrawal of the suit could not affect the respondent's independent right to litigate the property dispute, and dismissed the appeal.
Lesson Learnt
When someone buys property that is already the subject of pending litigation, they can step into that very suit as a party to protect their purchase: the original parties cannot simply settle or withdraw the case behind the buyer's back to defeat that right.