Supreme Court Lays Down Principles for Third-Party Leave to Appeal Against a Decree
The Supreme Court in H. Anjanappa & Ors. v. A. Prabhakar & Ors. examined when a third party to a suit can seek leave to appeal against a decree. A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan addressed this issue while hearing an appeal by a lis pendens transferee, aggrieved by the High Court’s refusal to grant leave to appeal against a decree for specific performance of a sale agreement.
After analyzing precedents, the Court summarized key principles:
1. Sections 96 and 100 CPC allow appeals against original and appellate decrees but do not specify who can file them.
2. A stranger cannot appeal unless they qualify as an aggrieved person.
3. Only those prejudicially affected by a judgment and decree, despite not being parties, may appeal with the court’s leave.
4. An aggrieved person must have a legally affected right, not a psychological or imaginary grievance.
5. Leave should not be granted to those indirectly affected.
6. Ordinarily, leave is given to non-parties who would be bound by the decree and unable to challenge it elsewhere.
The Court further held that a lis pendens transferee, even if not impleaded under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC, may seek leave to appeal against the final decree against their transferor. However, granting such leave is discretionary and must be exercised judiciously based on case-specific facts.