1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5250 OF 2008. Ritesh Suresh Shanane & Ors. Vs. Omprakash Narayandas Mundada ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri R. S. Kurekar Adv. for petitioner. CORAM: C. L. PANGARKAR J. DATED: 10 th JUNE, 2009. This Writ Petition is preferred against the order passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division Malegaon, whereby he allowed the applications Exh. 27 and 28 partly. The respondent had instituted a suit for possession against the appellants and others. Respondent had applied for withdrawal of the suit. 2 The permission was rejected by the Court. Thereafter respondent made an application for addition of parties to the suit and for condonation of delay in filing the application for restoration of the suit against defendants 2 to 4. The suit was dismissed against defendants 2 and 3 on the ground that the summons was not served and as far as defendant No.4 is concerned it was found that proper address is not known and no summons has been served on him inspite of the directions. Learned Judge found that the suit could not have been dismissed as against defendants 2 and 3 because the summons was served on the eldest male member of the family i.e. defendant No.1. He therefore set aside dismissal of the suit as against defendants 2 and 3 but refused to set aside the dismissal as against defendant No.4. Defendants, feeling aggrieved by this order filed this Writ Petition. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner it is clear that the summons was served as far as defendants 2 and 3 are concerned 3 on the eldest male member of the family which can be said to be a good service. In the circumstances the learned Judge who had passed the initial order was wrong in dismissing the suit. Learned Judge of the trial Court has therefore rightly recalled that order. I, therefore, do not see that the order suffers from any illegality or impropriety. There is no substance in the petition. It is dismissed in limine. JUDGE svk