1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 588 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders. Shri S.G. Surana for the Petitioner. Shri Kunal Cheema for Respondents. -- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 29th January 2010. P.C.: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. The Petitioner who is a third Defendant has taken out a Chamber Summons seeking direction against the Plaintiffs to implead MHADA as a party Defendant to the suit. By the impugned order, the said Chamber Summons has been dismissed. 2. After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners, I find that no case for interference is made out. The trial Court has observed that a Plaintiff is dominus litis and if ultimately it is found that the MHADA is a necessary party, the Plaintiffs will have to 2 face consequences. The learned Trial Judge was justified in not issuing a direction to the Plaintiffs to implead MHADA as one of the party Defendants. The Writ Petition is rejected. However, issue of effect of non- joinder of MHADA as a party Defendant is kept open. (A.S.OKA,J