Widow of Transferee Pendente Lite Entitled to be Added as Party in Consolidated Partition–Probate Proceedings.

Headnote:

The Delhi High Court held that a widow of a transferee pendente lite is entitled to be impleaded as a party under Order I Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) in consolidated proceedings for partition and probate. The Court observed that the appellant’s late husband, being a transferee pendente lite, had derived rights under a consent decree relating to the suit property. Her presence was necessary for effective adjudication and to prevent conflicting decrees or multiplicity of litigation.

Background:

1. The plaintiffs had filed CS (OS) No. 98/1998 seeking partition, rendition of accounts, and injunction concerning property at B-7/111A Extension, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi, based on a Will dated 28.10.1988 executed by Smt. Sushila Ranbir.
2. A parallel Probate Petition (TEST.CAS. 17/2005) was filed regarding another Will dated 10.06.1989 by the same testatrix, leading to consolidation of both proceedings.
3. The appellant’s late husband, Sh. Shoukat Rai Malhotra, purchased parts of the property via Agreements to Sell (1997) and secured a Consent Decree dated 07.11.2006 in CS (OS) 125/2005 recognizing ownership over the basement, second floor, and terrace.
4. He was impleaded as a transferee pendente lite in the probate proceedings. After his death on 04.09.2020, his widow, Meenakshi Malhotra, sought impleadment based on his Will dated 15.03.2018.
5. The Single Judge dismissed her impleadment plea (29.02.2024), holding that she was neither a necessary nor a proper party.

Contentions:

Appellant:

1. Claimed derivative ownership from her late husband and the Will executed in her favour.
2. Argued that her presence was necessary to avoid multiplicity and ensure effective adjudication of property rights.
3. Explained that delay occurred as her husband’s vendor (Anand Kamal Goel) represented his interest until his death in 2023.

Respondents:

1. Contended that she lacked locus in the partition suit, which concerned heirs of the testatrix.
2. Argued that the consent decree was collusive and obtained despite an injunction restraining alienation.
3. Asserted that impleadment after two decades was barred by delay and principles of lis pendens.
4. Sought appointment of an Administrator General instead of allowing impleadment.

Court’s Observations:

1. The Court noted that Sh. Shoukat Rai Malhotra had been recognized as a transferee pendente lite and that the appellant derived her rights from him.
2. Distinguished between Order I Rule 10 CPC (impleadment) and Order XXII CPC (substitution) — holding that the appellant’s plea fell within the former since she sought to be added for effective adjudication, not substitution.
3. Observed that lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act does not prevent impleadment; it merely subordinates the transferee’s rights to the outcome of pending litigation.
4. Found that delay in filing for impleadment was justified as necessity arose only after the vendor’s death in 2023.
5. Held that the appellant’s participation would prevent inconsistent findings between partition and probate proceedings.

Held:

1. Appeal allowed.
2. The appellant, widow and legatee of a transferee pendente lite, is to be impleaded as a party in the consolidated partition–probate proceedings under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC.
3. Such impleadment will ensure complete and effective adjudication and prevent multiplicity of proceedings.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

1. Order I Rule 10(2), Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Addition of necessary and proper parties.
2. Order XXII, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Substitution of legal representatives.
3. Section 52, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Doctrine of lis pendens.

Citation: 2025:DHC:XXXXXX

Case: Meenakshi Malhotra v. G.L. Tandon (Since Deceased) & Ors.

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Coram: Justice Anil Kshetarpal & Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar

Date of Decision: 13 November 2025

Appeal No.: FAO (OS) 76/2024, CM APPL. 31731/2024 & 31733/2024