Vijay Subhash Patil & Anr. v. Maya Sanjay Patil Mr. Aditya S Raktade, Advocate & Ors.
Case at a glance
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In view of the aforestated peculiar circumstances, no error is noted in the order under challenge. The Petition sans merits. Accordingly, stands dismissed. (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) IRESH MASHAL MASHAL +0530 Iresh
Judgment
Mr. Aditya S Raktade, Advocate for Petitioners CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 18th MARCH 2026. P.C.
#2. Heard. The petitioners have raised an exception to the order dated 19/06/2025 rendered by District Judge-1, Islampur, below Exhibit 24 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 6/2020 seeking impleadment as a party in a pending proceeding between the respondents herein, which came to be rejected.
#3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the third party having purchased the suit property pursuant to sale deed dated 16/02/2019 in relation to which Regular Civil Suit No. 20/2014 was decreed vide Judgment and Order dated 25/03/2019 by Jt. Civil Judge, Junior Division, Shirala. Consequently, the appeal, was preferred and during its pendency, the petitioners Iresh 2 65-WP-429-2026 (C).DOC herein sought impleadment, being bonafide purchasers of the disputed property contending that it affects their proprietary rights. However, the Appellate Court has failed to exercise its jurisdiction judiciously and has rejected their application for the same while rendering the order under challenge.
#4. Upon considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and perusal of the record indicates that the decree in a suit against which the aforesaid appeal is preferred was instituted in the year 2014 challenging the sale deed executed in the year 2005. The record further indicates that the present petitioners being third party, conscious of pending litigations, purchased the disputed suit property on 16/02/2019 while the suit was decreed on 25/03/2019. Thus, the said property was purchased at the fag end of the litigation, as such, the present petitioners are bound by the outcome of the proceedings. All these aspects are rightly considered and appreciated by the Appellate Court.
#5. In any event, the petitioners’ interest is adequately represented by the vendor, who has already presented an Appeal. Allowing such impleadment at the appellate stage would complicate and delay the proceedings those are otherwise between the original litigating parties. Iresh 3 65-WP-429-2026 (C).DOC
#6. In view of the aforestated peculiar circumstances, no error is noted in the order under challenge. The Petition sans merits. Accordingly, stands dismissed. (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) IRESH MASHAL MASHAL +0530 Iresh
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.