SATISH KRISHNAPPA SALIAN Vs. MAJID ANSARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Advocates for Respondents waive notice. By consent heard forthwith. The short question involved in this petition is whether the Petitioners are to be made parties to the suit filed by the Respondent nos. 1 in the City Civil Court, Bombay.

(2.) THE Respondent no.1 filed S.C.Suit No.2833/1994 praying for declaration that he is lawful allottee and in possession of the suit premises i.e. room no.28 situated at 41/43 Police Court Lane, Fort, Bombay-1. The said room is also claimed by the Petitioners as successor to the original tenant Krishnapa Salian. The same room is also claimed by third party by name Bhimrao Jagtap. He has also filed S.C.Suit No.1326/1994 praying for declaration that he is entitled to the suit premises i.e. room no.28 situated at 41/43 Police Court Lane, Fort, Bombay-1 till he is restored back possession of his original premises at Room No.52/1302, D.L.Marg, Parel, Bombay-12, after due repairs and construction. The Petitioners themselves have filed a Writ Petition in this Court bearing No.2358/94 against Respondents and Bhimrao Jagtap.

(3.) THE Petitioners also took out Chamber Summons No.1500/1994 to implead themselves as party defendants to the suit filed by Respondent no.1. The said application came to be rejected by the learned Judge of City Civil Court, Bombay by order dated 15-3-1995 on the ground that the Petitioners are not proper or necessary parties. For arriving at this conclusion he went into merits of the main matter. The same is under challenge in this appeal.