from the property, in execution of the decree passed in the suit and therefore, he who is purported to be a stranger to the decree, can very well adjudicate his claim of independent right, title and interest in the decretal property as per Order XXI Rule 99 CPC. 15. In so far as the claim of appellants that the predecessor of the respondents, namely Mr.Raghuthaman, being pendent lite transferee and hence would have no locus to file the application seeking re-delivery, we have already held that “any person” not a party to the suit or in other words a stranger to the suit can seek re- delivery, after he has been dispossessed. The term “Stranger” would cover within its ambit, a pendent lite transferee, who has not been impleaded. That apart, the facts in the present case disclose that the property stood transferred to the predecessor of the respondents before the Final Decree was passed in 1970. The fact that Mr.Raghuthaman had successfully resisted the claim of the 9th Defendant for