IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NIO. 23 OF 2009 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 101 OF 2006 Dinanath Kashinath Gurav ..... ..... ...Applicant. V/s Kiran Ramdas Naik ..... ..... ...Respondent. Ms.Anulata Sondankar i/by Ms.Gauri Godse, Adv. for the applicant. Ms.Bhagwashri Joshi h/f Mr.D.N.Salvi, Adv. for the respondent. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 21st March, 2009. PC: By orders dated 2.6.08 and 28.7.08 the appeal has been dismissed against respondent No.6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicants along respondent No.6 were original plaintiffs. They were also appellants before first appellate court. However as respondent No.6 was not available at the time of filing of appeal she was impleaded as respondent No.6. On account of non service of notice the appeal had been dismissed against her. In such fact situation a prayer is made in present application for setting aside the impugned orders dismissing the appeal against respondent No.6. Learned counsel for respondents 1 to 5 has no objection for allowing the application. In the result for the reasons set out in the application same is allowed and disposed of. Issue Notice to respondent No.6. Returnable in six weeks. Humdust allowed.