In a final decree proceeding (FDP) pertaining to an HUF dwelling house, the sole plaintiff and 9 out of the 13 defendants therein sold their undivided shares in the dwelling house to a stranger during the pendency of the FDP, without the permission of the trial court and behind the back of the remaining 4 defendants. The stranger purchaser did not obtain permission of the court to purchase the undivided shares. 4 years after the purchase of the undivided shares, the stranger purchaser applied to the court to be impleaded as a plaintiff, but was permitted by the court to come on record only as defendant no:14 along with 4 other defendants(members of the joint family) who have not sold their undivided shares. The dwelling house is in the joint and actual physical possession of the 4 defendants. The property is yet to be partitioned by metes and bounds and no order has been passed by the trial court in this regard. The 4 defendants had contested the suit for partition while the 9 others did not do so nor did they file their defence.
Under the above circumstances, whether the present FDP is maintainable.? Can the defendant no:14, a stranger to the family enforce his rights in the present FDP to get the undivided shares purchased by him from other family members demarcated.? Is there any specific ruling of the Supreme Court or of the High Courts as to the non-maintainabilty of the FDP in such circumstances. Can you kindly help me by giving the relevant citations.
