CR-3261-2025




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-3261-2025 Date of decision: 22.01.2026 Naresh Kumar ...Peoner Versus Vikram Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present: Mr. Vivek Goyal, Advocate for the peoner. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The peoner, who is one of the legal representaves of deceased defendant No.1 – Jasmer Singh, is before this Court assailing the order dated 20.03.2025 (Annexure P-1), passed by the learned Addional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kurukshetra, in Civil Suit No.755 of 2017 tled Vikram Singh v. Jasmer Singh, whereby an applicaon moved by the plainff under Order I Rule 10 CPC for impleadment of subsequent transferees of the suit property has been allowed. 2. The suit was instuted by respondent No.1–plainff seeking a decree of specific performance on the basis of an agreement to sell dated 02.01.2016, executed by Jasmer Singh for a total sale consideraon of ₹4,12,500/-, out of which an amount of ₹4,00,000/- was received as earnest money. During the pendency of the proceedings, the plainff asserted that on 15.09.2023, he came to know that despite the subsistence of the agreement to sell, Jasmer Singh had executed a transfer deed No. 1633/1 dated 29.11.2016 in favour of Manpreet Singh, Ravi and Parbhat (respondents No.2 to 4 herein), pursuant whereto mutaon No.656 had also been sanconed. On these pleadings, the plainff sought their impleadment, which prayer has been accepted by the learned trial Court. YOGESH MEHTA 2026.01.23 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CR-3261-2025




3. Learned counsel for the peoner contends that the subsequent transferees were neither necessary nor proper pares to the suit and that the trial Court erred in allowing their impleadment. 4. This Court finds no substance in the aforesaid contenon. 5. The scope of Order I Rule 10 CPC is well se@led. The provision empowers the Court to add any party whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to effecvely and completely adjudicate upon and se@le all the quesons involved in the suit. A “necessary party” is one without whom no effecve decree can be passed, whereas a “proper party” is one whose presence enables the Court to completely and effecvely adjudicate upon the dispute. 6. In a suit for specific performance, the queson of impleadment of subsequent transferees is governed by Secon 19(b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, which expressly provides that a decree for specific performance may be enforced against any person claiming under the vendor by a tle arising subsequently to the contract, except a transferee for value who has paid his money in good faith and without noce of the original contract. Thus, the rights of subsequent transferees are directly intertwined with the relief sought in the suit. 7. In the present case, it is an admi@ed posion that the transfer deed in favour of respondents No.2 to 4 was executed on 29.11.2016, whereas the suit for specific performance was instuted on 11.07.2017. Consequently, the subsequent transferees derive their tle from the original vendor and claim through him. Any decree for possession by way of specific performance, if granted, would directly affect their rights and interest in the property. 8. In the absence of their impleadment, the trial Court would not YOGESH MEHTA 2026.01.23 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CR-3261-2025




be in a posion to pass an effecve and executable decree. Moreover, non- impleadment of such transferees would give rise to mulplicity of proceedings and may render the decree in-executable, thereby defeang the very object of the suit. 9. The learned trial Court has, therefore, rightly exercised its discreon in allowing the applicaon under Order I Rule 10 CPC. The order neither suffers from any jurisdiconal error nor discloses any perversity warranng interference in revisional jurisdicon. 10. Resultantly, finding no merit in the present revision peon, the same is hereby dismissed 22.01.2026 (DEEPAK GUPTA) Yogesh JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No YOGESH MEHTA 2026.01.23 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document