JUDGMENT : DINESH MEHTA, J. 1. By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.9.2016, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge No. 2, Udaipur, whereby the application seeking impleadment filed by respondent No. 14 Deva and respondent No. 15 Shankar has been allowed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that during the pendency of the said proceedings, the property has been purchased by the applicants Deva & Shankar (respondents No. 14 & 15) by way of registered sale deed dated 13.6.2013. The said purchasers being bona fide purchasers, have moved an application seeking impleadment under Order 1, Rule 10 CPC. 3. Learned Court below while relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Thomson Press (India) Ltd. v. Nanak Builders and Investors Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. reported in AIR 2013 SC 2389 has allowed the said application and impleaded the applicants as respondents being No. 14 and 15 to the suit. 4. Mr. Rajat Dave, learned counsel for the petitioner cited a judgment rendered in the case of Vidur Impex and Traders Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v. Tosh Apartment Pvt. Ltd and Ors. reported in AIR 2012 SC 2925 and based on the principles enunciated therein, contended that even a bona fide purchaser is not required to be impleaded as party and his rights will be governed by the provisions of Transfer of Property Act. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and considered the material available on record. 6. The court below has followed the subsequent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in case of Thomson Press (India) Ltd. (supra) and has permitted impleadment of respondents No. 14 & 15. The principles laid down in this judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court applies squarely to the present case. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show how presence of respondents No. 14 & 15 will prejudice the cause of the plaintiff. 8. In the back drop of the facts and law on the subject, this Court is of the considered opinion that once the learned court below has exercised a discretion vested in it and allowed impleadment of the applicants, interference of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is uncalled for, particularly when the issue has been set at rest by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Thomson press case. 9. 9. In view of the above, I find no force in the present writ petition and the same is dismissed hereby.