1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 216 OF 2010 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1061 Of 1999 Smt. Indumati Wamanrao Dahanukar (since deceased) & Anr. ... Applicants Vs. Shri Uday Ashok Dahanukar & Anr. ... Respondents Shri S.U.Dhakephalkar, Advocate, for the applicants. Shri Ashok B. Tajane, Advocate, for the respondents. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 15th March , 2010. P.C. 1. The application is moved by the applicant no.2, who is the original defendant no.2 and appellant no.2. The name of appellant No.1 – Smt. Indumati Dahanukar, who has exired, is sought to be deleted and it is contended that her L.Rs. are already parties to the present litigation. The plaintiff is her deceased son’s son and he is already on record. The Counsel for the respondent No. 1/plaintiff contends that name of the respondent no.1 should also be shown as L.R. of the deceased in the title. It is difficult to accept his contention. It is an admitted fact that the respondent no.1 is the original plaintiff, while the others were the defendants. Defendant No.3, who is respondent No.2 before this Court, is the 2 daughter of deceased Indumati. Appellant no.2 is her son. In view of this, the L.Rs. of Indumati are on record and therefore there can be no objection to delete her name. It cannot be accepted that respondent No.1, who is plaintiff, be also shown as one of the heirs of the appellant-defendant. 2. Therefore, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Amendment be made within one week from today. Application stands disposed of. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)