1 FARHAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 725 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 3333 OF 2008 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr. S.B. Rohile, Advocate for applicant. Mr. C.R. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent No. 1. CORAM: K.U. CHANDIWAL J. DATED: 29th April, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Rohile for the appellant and Mr. C.R. Deshpande for the respondent. By application 725/2010, a request is made to allow the appellant to substitute respondent No. 2 in the title clause of the appeal as Ramanlal s/o. Bansilal Tiwari and order dated 28th August 2009 passed by this Court to be recalled. 2. On perusal of the record, it is obvious, Ramanlal s/o. Bansilal Tiwari was already defendant No. 2, while his father Bansilal was defendant No. 1. It may be that legal representatives of Bansilal Ratanlal Tiwari are not brought on record. However, the individual status of Ramanlal to be added as party cannot be obliterated. There is obvious mistake causing delay in the exercise. The delay is not deliberate. The mistake is due to inadvertance. Since counsel 2 feels Ramanlal s/o. Bansilal Tiwari being already on record in Special Suit No. 141/03, the substitution sought in the first appeal for respondent No. 2 from Bansilal s/o. Ratanlal Tiwai to Ramanlal s/o. Bansilal Tiwari is allowed. Delay, if any, is condoned. The necessary amendment to be effected forthwith. Notice to the newly added respondent Ramanlal s/o. Bansilal Tiwari, returnable on 3.5.2010. [ K.U. CHANDIWAL J. ] ssc/ca725.10