1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10650 OF 2009 Niloba Bajirao Bendre ...Petitioner vs. Suryaji Bajirao Bendre ...Respondent Mr.J.D.Khairnar for the petitioner None for the respondent CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : FEBRUARY 2, 2010 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who is the original plaintiff. An application was made by the petitioner for impleading the District Collector as a party defendant to the suit. By the impugned order, the said application has been rejected. 2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the suit an allegation has been specifically made regarding the role played by the Revenue Officers in effecting certain mutation entries and in the suit it is contended that by a conspiracy, a particular mutation entry has been effected. 3 I have considered the submissions. The suit filed by the petitioner is for declaration of ownership and partition. The suit is on the title. The mutation entries made in the revenue record are only for fiscal purposes and the same have no bearing on the issue of title. Hence, the trial Court was right in rejecting the prayer for impleading the Collector as a party-defendant to the suit as the Collector is neither a necessary nor a proper party to the suit. 2 4 Subject to what is observed above, Writ Petition is rejected. JUDGE