1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8624 OF 2009 1. Mr. Dattatraya Jadhav & ors. ....Petitioners vs 1. Mrs. Neena Laxmikant Sharma & ors. ....Respondents Mr. P.S. Dani for the Petitioners. Mr. S.M. Suryawanshi for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 10TH FEBRUARY, 2010. P.C. :- 1. Rule. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally. 2. The Petitioner has challenged the order of the Trial Court allowing an amendment to implead the Petitioners as Defendant Nos.7, 8 and 9. The Suit is filed by the Respondents No.1 and 2, inter alia, for an injunction restraining Defendant Nos.1 to 3 from carrying out any 2 further construction on the suit premises and selling the flats therein. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 i.e. the original Plaintiffs also sought an order directing Defendant Nos.4 to 6 to cancel the plans approved and for restoration of the construction to the original position. 3. The allegations against the proposed Defendants i.e. the Petitioners are, inter alia, in paragraphs 4 (x) and (xi) and in paragraph 7 of the Plaint. If the allegations against the Petitioners are proved, they may have serious consequences, not merely against the present Defendants, but even against the Petitioners. In these circumstances, the Petitioners are, at least, proper if not a necessary parties. The Petitioners have also already filed the written statement. 4. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed.