1 dgm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7037 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court’s or Judge’s of Coram, appearances, Court’s Orders orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. ------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.U.P.Warunjikar for the petitioner. Mr.V.S.Kapse for respondent no.1. CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED : 18.12.2008 P.C. Admittedly, though chamber summons in question was taken out to re-call the order passed on 22.08.2008 in favour of plaintiff by the petitioner, they were not party to the proceedings. They never even applied for the same. Therefore, the leaned Court rejected their chamber summons. A person who is party to the proceedings and if apply for such re-calling the order, it is desirable that the court either grant leave or permit them to add as a party so that appropriate 2 order or relief can be passed for or against them. Having once observed that they are not parties to the proceedings and neither there is an application filed for joining the same, then, in my view, there is no point of passing detailed and reasoned order on merits of the matter. Any third person, if aggrieved by any order passed, he can apply to join as a party and that leave or permission of the court and then court may consider the case. Here, there is no such application as recorded above. Therefore, without observing anything on merits, by consent, the impugned orders are quashed and set aside. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to apply afresh. The Court to pass order in accordance with law on its own merits. In view of this, petition is disposed of. [ANOOP [ANOOP [ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.] V. MOHTA,J.] V. MOHTA,J.]