:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.4150 OF 2008 PETITION NO.4150 OF 2008 PETITION NO.4150 OF 2008 Mangalya Bamya Paradhi and others ..Petitioners V/s Hasuram Hirya Thakur and others ..Respondents. Mr.R.R. Mishra for the petitioners Mr.Uday Warunjikar for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.A. SAYED, J. : A.A. SAYED, J. : A.A. SAYED, J. DATE DATE DATE : 19TH JUNE, 2008 : 19TH JUNE, 2008 : 19TH JUNE, 2008 P.C. 1. By order dated 2-5-2008, the Jt. Civil Judge, Panvel, has allowed the application of the Ori. plaintiff to implead the respondent Nos. 9 to 41 in the Application, who are the purchasers of flats and galas as party-defendants in the suit, which order is questioned in this petition. 2. The Trial Court has considered the fact that the Orig. plaintiffs have 1/6th share in the suit property and that the flats and galas have been sold to the said respondent Nos.8 to 41. In the plaint amongst other prayers it is specifically prayed that the premises in question be demolished. It would therefore be necessary to implead the flats and galas purchasers in the suit in the likely event of the :2: Court coming to the conclusion that such prayer can be granted; whereupon the rights of the said respondent Nos.8 to 41 would definitely be affected. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the application has been filed with ulterior motive and merely to embarrass the petitioners, who are builders and developers and who have sold the flats and galas in question. It is further submitted that the petitioner has already submitted an undertaking in the Trial Court that they would compensate the respondents ultimately if they succeed in the trial Court. The learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3/ original-plaintiffs has pointed out that the provisions of order 6 rule 17 and submitted that since the trial has not commenced his prayer for amendment ought not to be refused, particularly looking at the nature of the prayers in his plaint and the impugned order has been rightly passed 4. After considering the rival contentions of the parties and on perusal of the impugned order and the material on record, I find no infirmity or illegality :3: in the impugned order, so as to set aside the same. The discretion exercised by the trial Court cannot be faulted. 2. In the result, the petition is dismissed. ( A.A. SAYED, J.) A.A. SAYED, J.) A.A. SAYED, J.)