JUDGMENT : S.G. PANDIT, J. 1. Petitioners are before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 18.10.2019 in O.S.No.4241/2004 on the file of 43 Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, by which, the application filed under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC is rejected. 2. The suit is one for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property to an extent of 6/5th share and for permanent injunction. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the writ petition papers. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the suit is already posted for judgment. The application under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC was filed contending that the proposed defendants are purchasers of the suit schedule property and they would be necessary parties to the proceedings. 5. The trial Court, under the impugned order rightly rejected the application. Similar applications were filed earlier, which were allowed. In the instant application, the purchasers said to have purchased the suit schedule property during the years 2004 to 2016. The petitioners are not diligent in prosecutings the case. When the matter is at the stage of arguments, the present application is filed. The trial Court has rightly observed that if the proposed applicants are necessary parties, they could be impleaded even at the stage of Final Decree Proceedings. I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ petition stands rejected.