IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NOS. 9627 OF 2009 AND WRIT PETITION NO. 9628 OF 2009. Kisan B. Shinde Cyrush Khajotia ..... ..... ...Petitioners V/s Brihan Mumbai Mun. Corpn. & Anr. ..... ..... .Respondents. Mr.Nitin Vatkar and Mr.R.S.Apte, i/by Mr.G.S.Hiranandani, Adv. for the petitioners. None for the Respondents. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 3rd December, 2009. PC: The present petitioners are tenants who have instituted suit calling in question the legality of notice issued by BMC under section 351 of BMC Act. Notice is in relation to demolition of some structure allegedly being unauthorized and illegal. The Landlord moved an application for his impledment as party­defendant in the suit by contending that he has an interest in the property and he would be prejudiced if he is not heard in the matter. As the notice issued by the Corporation relates to alleged unauthorized and illegal construction and its consequential demolition the trial court has allowed the application and permitted the impledment of respondent­applicant being the landlord. It is this order which is challenged by filing the present writ petitions. Perused the impugned order. Same does not call for any interference. There being no illegality much less patent writ petitions stand dismissed summarily. 30.12.2009.