Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 10192-10195 OF 2018
(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 31814-31817 OF 2015)
B. FATHIMA BEEVI AND ANOTHER ...APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
SORNAMMAL @ SORNAM (DEAD) TH.LRS.AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Civil Appeal No. 10192 of 2018 @ S.L.P.(Civil) No. 31814
of 2015 has been preferred against the order of the Madras
High Court (Madurai Bench) in and by which the High Court
affirmed the order of the Trial Court dismissing the
application for impleading the applicant herein.
3. The Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 filed the suit for
declaration of title and recovery of possession in the year
2002. The appellants herein, namely, B. Fathima Beevi and M.
Kabir Mohammed claimed that they have purchased the suit
Signature Not Verified
property by two sale deeds dated 09.03.2012 and 14.03.2012
Digitally signed by
MADHU BALA
Date: 2018.12.15
11:12:52 IST
Reason: for valuable consideration from respondent nos. 1 to 4 -
plaintiffs. The appellants herein filed interlocutory
2
application being 630 of 2014 to implead themselves on the
basis of their sale deeds. Respondent Nos. 5 & 6, the
defendants in the suit resisted the application contending
that the sale deeds are fraudulent since respondent nos. 1 to
4-plaintiffs themselves do not have the title and they
themselves are seeking for declaration of the title.
4. The Trial Court dismissed the impleading application on
the ground that respondent nos. 1 to 4 -plaintiffs have filed
the suit way back in the year 2002 for declaration and for
recovery of possession. The Trial Court further held that the
suit property is in dispute right from the year 1995 and,
therefore, the appellants-herein cannot be said to be bona
fide purchaser. The Trial Court held that impleading the
appellants herein would amount to (i) presumption of the
plaintiffs title; and (ii) the appellants herein might set up
a plea of bona fide purchase.
5. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the impleading
application, the appellants have filed Revision Petition
before the High Court which again came to be dismissed as
aforesaid.
6. We have heard Mr. V. Prabhakar, learned counsel for the
appellants as well as Mr. Antony R. Julian, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent nos. 5 & 6 and taking into
account the impugned judgment and materials on record.
7. No doubt respondent nos. 1 to 4 - plaintiffs have filed
the suit for declaration of their title alleging that their
title is disputed and that cannot in any way be an impediment
3
for the appellants who are the subsequent purchasers, for
being impleaded. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 5-6
submitted that the appellants herein are not the bona fide
purchasers and they knowingly purchased the litigation. The
merits of this contention whether the purchase by the
appellants is bona fide or not is to be agitated only at the
time of the trial after the parties adduce oral and
documentary evidence. Since the appellants have purchased the
suit property after the filing of the suit, in order to have
an effective adjudication and also to afford opportunity to
the appellants, the impleading application i.e. I.A. No. 630
of 2014 is to be allowed and the appeal arising out of the
SLP(C)No. 31814 of 2015 is to be allowed.
8. Insofar as appeals arising out of SLP(C)Nos. 31815,
31816 and 31817 of 2015 - application filed for change of
Commissioner, application for temporary injunction and
application for appointment of a receiver, in view of the
concurrent findings recorded by the Trial Court as well as by
the High Court, we are not inclined to interfere with those
orders. The appeals arising out SLP(C)Nos. 31815, 31816 and
31817 of 2015 are, accordingly, dismissed.
9. The impugned order of the High court (insofar as it
arises out of I.A. No. 630/2014) in C.R.P. No. 1088 of 2015 is
set aside and the appeal arising out of SLP(C)No. 31814 of
2015 is allowed. After impleadment of the appellants as
plaintiffs, the defendants shall file their additional written
statement, if any, within a period of four weeks from today
4
and the appellants are permitted to file their rejoinder
within four weeks thereafter.
�.......................J.
[R. BANUMATHI]
�......................J.
[INDIRA BANERJEE]
NEW DELHI
3RD OCTOBER, 2018
5
REVISED
ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.10 SECTION XII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal(C)No(s). 31814-31817/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-06-2015
in CRPMD No. 1088/2015 CRPMD No. 1089/2015 CRPMD No. 1090/2015
CRPMD No. 1091/2015 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At
Madras At Madurai)
B. FATHIMA BEEVI AND ANOTHER Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SORNAMMAL @ SORNAM (DEAD) TH. LRS.AND OTHERS Respondent(s)
(Application for exemption from filing O.T.)
Date : 03-10-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
HONBLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE
For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Prabhakar,Adv.
Ms. Jyoti Parashar,Adv.
Mr. N.J. Ramchandar,Adv.
Mr. S. Rajappa, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Antony R. Julian,Adv.
Mr. Danish Zubair Khan, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal arising out of SLP(C)No. 31814 of 2015 is
allowed and the appeals arising out SLP(C)Nos. 31815, 31816 and
31817 of 2015 are, accordingly, dismissed in terms of the signed
order.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed
of.
(MADHU BALA) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA)
COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
(Corrected signed order is placed on the file)
6
ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.10 SECTION XII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal(C)No(s). 31814-31817/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-06-2015
in CRPMD No. 1088/2015 CRPMD No. 1089/2015 CRPMD No. 1090/2015
CRPMD No. 1091/2015 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At
Madras At Madurai)
B. FATHIMA BEEVI AND ANOTHER Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SORNAMMAL @ SORNAM (DEAD) TH. LRS.AND OTHERS Respondent(s)
(Application for exemption from filing O.T.)
Date : 03-10-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
HONBLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE
For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Prabhakar,Adv.
Ms. Jyoti Parashar,Adv.
Mr. N.J. Ramchandar,Adv.
Mr. S. Rajappa, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Antony R. Julian,Adv.
Mr. Danish Zubair Khan, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal arising out of SLP(C)No. 31814 of 2015 is
allowed and the appeals arising out SLP(C)Nos. 31815, 31816 and
31817 of 2015 are, accordingly, dismissed in terms of the signed
order.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed
of.
(MADHU BALA) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA)
COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
(Signed order is placed on the file)
