IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLIATION NO. 1679 OF 2008 IN SECOND APPEAL (ST.) NO. 29246 OF 2007 Smt.Krishnabai Laxman Kadam.... ..... ...Applicant V/s Baburao Laxman Kadam & Ors... .... . ..Respondents. Mr.P.G.Chavan, Adv. For the applicant. Mr.Ashok Tajane, Adv. For Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Mr.Dilip Bodake, Adv. For respondent Nos. 3 to 5. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 29th JANUARY, 2009. PC: The application is for seeking leave of the Court to file an appeal as the appellant was not impleded as party in the first appeal. The present appellant acting as guardian of her two minor children instituted a suit for partition as natural guardian of said two minor children in the trial Court. It so happened that the appellant was not shown as one of the plaintiff and/or defendant in the suit. The trial Court, it seems being aware of the fact that the present appellant is mother of the plaintiffs who were minor and being of the view that she had a share in the property, did allot the share in the property to her by passing decree for partition. However when the first appeal came to be filed by the plaintiffs who had by then attained majority, the present appellant was not impleded as party and hence according 1 to the appellant she was unaware about the filing of the appeal and the date of passing of the decree by the first appellate court. It is submitted that as the trial court has granted share to the present appellant she ought to have been impleded as party in the first appeal and at any rate it is contended that leave to file an appeal need to be granted to the present appellant as the first appellate court had denied her the share in the interest of justice. In the above set of facts I have no iota of doubt that the applicant is entitled to leave to file second appeal. Hence leave to file appeal is granted. Civil Application No.1679/08 stands disposed of. 29.01.2009. 2