---
title: "Impleading Petitions Can Be Entertained at Any Stage Before Judgment: Madras High Court Clarifies"
date: 2025-07-08
author: "Aaushi Doshi"
url: https://www.indialaw.in/blog/civil/impleading-petitions-valid-till-judgment/
---

# Impleading Petitions Can Be Entertained at Any Stage Before Judgment: Madras High Court Clarifies

Posted On - 8 July, 2025 •

By - [Aaushi Doshi](https://www.indialaw.in/people/adv-aaushi-doshi/ "Posts by Aaushi Doshi") and [Gaurav Kawedia](https://www.indialaw.in/author/gaurav-kawedia/ "Posts by Gaurav Kawedia")

[![a person writing on a piece of paper - Impleading Petitions](https://www.indialaw.in/wp-content/uploads/ocdvugpsy94.jpg)](https://www.indialaw.in/wp-content/uploads/ocdvugpsy94.jpg)

## Introduction

In an important decision strengthening the rights of transferees pendente lite, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has reaffirmed that an impleading petitions can be entertained at any stage before the pronouncement of judgment. The ruling in P. Marimuthu v. S.S. Prabhakaran[1](#d3ff57de-7958-4fba-a2a9-824f39554558) provides useful guidance on the application of Order I Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), and the doctrine of lis pendens under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

## Factual Background

The dispute arose out of a suit for specific performance filed by S.S. Prabhakaran based on a sale agreement dated 25 July 2011. According to the plaintiff, the defendant, Subburaj, agreed to sell approximately 12 acres of land for a total consideration of Rs. 41,23,000/-, of which substantial advance payments were made. When the defendant failed to execute the sale deed, the plaintiff approached the Principal District Court, Virudhunagar.

During the pendency of the suit, the defendant sold the same property to a third party, P. Marimuthu, on 16 October 2015. When the original defendant failed to contest the suit and was set ex parte, Marimuthu, realising that the outcome could directly impact his rights as a subsequent purchaser, filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC to be impleaded as a party.

The trial court, however, dismissed the impleading petition on the ground that the suit had already been reserved for judgment. Shortly thereafter, the suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff. Aggrieved, Marimuthu filed an appeal under Section 96 CPC, challenging both the dismissal of his impleading application and the consequential decree.

## Arguments from Both Sides

The appellant contended that he was a bona fide purchaser for value who had acquired the property in good faith and taken possession. He argued that once it became clear that the original vendor had abandoned the proceedings, it was vital for him to be heard to protect his substantial civil rights. He further submitted that the expression “at any stage of the proceedings” in Order I Rule 10(2) CPC must be interpreted to include any time before the pronouncement of judgment.

The plaintiff resisted the appeal on the ground that the impleading application was belated since the suit had been reserved for judgment. The plaintiff further submitted that as a transferee pendente lite, the appellant was bound by the doctrine of lis pendens and could not assert rights contrary to the outcome of the original suit.

## Judicial Reasoning

The Division Bench, comprising Justices G.R. Swaminathan and M. Jothiraman, analysed the twin questions of the right of a transferee pendente lite to be impleaded and the scope of judicial discretion under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC.

The Court held that under Section 52 of the [Transfer of Property Act, 1882](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_of_Property_Act,_1882), transfers pendente lite are not void but remain subservient to the rights of the parties to the litigation. The doctrine of lis pendens protects the integrity of the judicial process by preventing any party from defeating the outcome by transferring property during the pendency of a suit.

However, relying on Supreme Court decisions such as Amit Kumar Shaw v. Farida Khatoon (2005) 11 SCC 403 and A. Nawab John v. V.N. Subramaniyam (2012) 7 SCC 738, the Court reiterated that a transferee pendente lite has a significant interest in defending the title and must ordinarily be allowed to participate in the proceedings, especially if there is a risk that the original party may not properly contest the suit.

Crucially, the Court rejected the argument that impleading petitions cannot be entertained once a matter is reserved for judgment. It clarified that the phrase “at any stage of the proceedings” used in Order I Rule 10(2) CPC unambiguously means any time prior to the pronouncement of judgment.

The Court also highlighted that the trial court should have given the appellant reasonable time to challenge the dismissal of his application before passing the final decree, rather than proceeding immediately. The possibility of collusion between the plaintiff and the original defendant, who had abandoned the contest, could not be ignored.

## Judgment

Setting aside the decree of the trial court, the High Court allowed the appeal and directed that the impleading application be accepted. The Court further directed that the trial court must permit the now impleaded defendant to cross-examine the plaintiff and adduce formal evidence regarding the sale deed. It emphasised that the proceedings should be concluded on merits and in accordance with law by 31 August 2025.

Importantly, the Court clarified that the vendor, having been set ex parte, would remain so, and that the newly impleaded defendant would step into the vendor’s shoes with the right to contest all issues already raised in the written statement.

## Implications for Future Cases

This judgment reinforces the principle that procedural technicalities should not defeat substantial rights, particularly when the risk of collusion or unfair prejudice to an innocent transferee exists. Transferees pendente lite are reminded that while the doctrine of lis pendens limits their rights, it does not extinguish them entirely. Courts have a duty to balance the doctrine with the need to ensure that parties with a legitimate interest are not left remediless.

For trial courts, the ruling clarifies that the power to implead parties under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC must be exercised with sensitivity to the facts of each case, even when proceedings are at an advanced stage.

## Conclusion

P. Marimuthu v. S.S. Prabhakaran serves as a timely reaffirmation of the judiciary’s commitment to protect bona fide purchasers and uphold the principle that impleading petitions can be entertained at any time before judgment. The decision strikes a careful balance between safeguarding the sanctity of pending litigation and preventing procedural injustice to parties whose substantial rights are at stake.

For more details, write to us at: [contact@indialaw.in](mailto:contact@indialaw.in)

1. A.S. (MD) No. 158 of 2020 [↩︎](#d3ff57de-7958-4fba-a2a9-824f39554558-link)

[Civil & Commercial Litigation](https://www.indialaw.in/expertise/litigation/civil-commercial-litigation/)[Property & Real Estate Advisory](https://www.indialaw.in/expertise/nri-legal-services/property-real-estate-advisory/)

---

# IndiaLaw LLP — Offices & Contact Details

---

## General Contact

| | |
|---|---|
| **Website** | https://www.indialaw.in |
| **Primary email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Primary phone** | +91 836-9995919 |
| **Contact form** | https://www.indialaw.in/connect/ |
| **Careers (separate channel)** | https://www.indialaw.in/careers/ |


---

## All Offices (9 locations across 8 cities)

### 1. Mumbai — Registered Office & Head Office (Apeejay Chambers)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Apeejay Chambers, Ground Floor, Wallace Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 |
| **Phone** | [022-6924-7400](tel:02269247400) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/mumbai/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Arbitration · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Corporate · Banking · Real Estate · IP |
| **Notes** | The HQ. 5 partners based here. Handles PAN-India litigation, arbitration, corporate, banking, IP and real estate practice. Largest team across all offices. |

### 2. Mumbai — Non-Litigation Office (Excelsior, Fort)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | 4th Floor, New Excelsior Theatre Pvt. Ltd., Amrit Keshav Nayak Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 |
| **Phone** | [022-697-40500](tel:022-697-40500) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/mumbai/ |
| **Practice focus** | Non-litigation only — consultations, negotiations, transactional work |
| **Notes** | Opened 2024. Litigation and arbitration remain at the Apeejay Chambers head office. |

### 3. Delhi

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Flat No. 1107 & 1108, Prakashdeep Building, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001 |
| **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/delhi/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Arbitration · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Corporate · Banking · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | 3 partners based here. Located near the Supreme Court of India, Delhi High Court and other appellate bodies. |

### 4. Kolkata

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Centre Point Building, Room No. 214, 2nd Floor, Premises No. 21, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Opp. Great Eastern Hotel, P.S. Hare Street, Kolkata – 700 001, West Bengal |
| **Phone** | [+91 33 4813 1001](tel:+913348131001) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/kolkata/ |
| **Practice focus** | Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Commercial & Civil Litigation · Arbitration · Banking Litigation · Real Estate · Labour & Employment · Consumer |
| **Notes** | Advises banks, NBFCs, MSMEs and corporates on transactions and dispute resolution. Works in close coordination with the Mumbai HO. |

### 5. Chennai

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | GF-A, 19 Casa Major Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008 |
| **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/chennai/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | Full-fledged office with experienced legal team. Supported by Mumbai HO. |

### 6. Bengaluru (Bangalore)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | INDIALAW LLP, No. 7 Chinnaswamy Mudaliar Road, Shivaji Nagar, Bangalore – 560 051 |
| **Phone** | [080-4167-2444](tel:08041672444) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/bengaluru/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate · Family Laws · Labour |
| **Notes** | Located near Bangalore High Court. Handles corporate, commercial, banking and matrimonial disputes. |

### 7. Hyderabad

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | 403, 4th Floor, Sanatana Ecstasy Building, beside Tanishq Show Room, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad – 500 029, Telangana |
| **Phone** | [040-6666-5166](tel:04066665166) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/hyderabad/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Banking · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | Particularly well known for complex banking matters and real estate transactions. |

### 8. Cochin (Kochi)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Second Floor, Pulikkal Building, K.K. Padmanabhan Road, Ernakulam North – 682 018, Kerala |
| **Phone** | [0484-3583961](tel:04843583961) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/cochin/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | Commercial disputes, property litigation, financial-claim arbitrations and real estate transactions. |

### 9. Noida (NCR)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | No. 16 & 17, Silver Offices, 17th Floor, Wave One, Sector 18, Noida – 201 301 |
| **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/noida/ |
| **Practice focus** | Aviation · Insurance · Mergers & Acquisitions · Corporate |
| **Office head** | **Mr. Dinesh Gupta** (joined August 2025 to lead and expand the corporate practice) |
| **Notes** | Newest office. Sector-focused on highly regulated industries serving NCR-based clients. |

---

## Quick-Dial Phone List

| Office | Phone |
|---|---|
| Mumbai HO (Apeejay) | 022-6924-7400 |
| Mumbai Excelsior | 022-697-40500 |
| Kolkata | +91 33 4813 1001 |
| Bengaluru | 080-4167-2444 |
| Hyderabad | 040-6666-5166 |
| Cochin | 0484-3583961 |
| **General / Marketing line** | **+91 836-9995919** |

Delhi, Chennai and Noida route through the general number.

---

## Social Channels

- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/indialaw
- X / Twitter: https://twitter.com/Indialawmumbai
- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/indialawllp/
- Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/indialawllp

---