1 wp-9764-11.sxw mmj IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.9764 OF 2011 Maqbulbi Shaikh Mohammed Yusuf & Ors. .. Petitioners Versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.S.M.Kamble for the Petitioner CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATED : 15th December, 2011 P.C. 1 The above Petition takes exception to the Order dated 30-9-2011 passed by the Learned Judge of Bombay City Civil Court, by which Order, the Chamber Summons No.53 of 2011 filed by the Petitioners herein for amendment of the pleadings to the effect of deleting the Plaintiff Nos.1 and 4 and to be transposed as the Defendant Nos.3 and 4, came to be partly allowed, whereby the deletion of the said Plaintiffs was allowed but their transposition was refused. 2 The Petitioners along with the Plaintiff Nos.1 and 4 have filed L.C.Suit No.246 of 2006 challenging the development, for a declaration and injunction in respect of a slum scheme being implemented on the plot of land on which they claim to be the tenants. The said development has been challenged inter alia on various grounds 2 wp-9764-11.sxw mentioned in the said suit. It appears that during the pendency of the said suit, the Plaintiff Nos.1 and 4 have settled the matter with the Defendant No.2 on account of which, the Plaintiff Nos.2 and 3 have filed the application for deletion of the Plaintiff Nos.1 and 4 and for their transposition as the Defendant Nos.3 and 4. The Trial Court was of the view that if the said Plaintiffs have settled the matter with the Defendant No.2, the names can be struck off but they cannot be transposed as the Defendant Nos.3 and 4. In my view, the said finding of the Trial Court cannot be faulted with since the Plaintiff Nos.1 and 4 have settled their matter. There is no lis between the said Plaintiffs with the Defendant No.2. Apart from that the Plaintiff Nos.1 and 4 cannot be said to have any interest adverse to the interest of the remaining plaintiffs, that they have to be joined as the Defendants. 3 In that view of the matter, no case for interference with the impugned order is made out. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. ( R. M. SAVANT, J. )