: 1 : USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1979 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.1099 OF 2009 Indira Harinder Rai D/o. Giryanna Shetty .. Plaintiff V/s. Sundari Wd/o. Giriyanna Shetty and Ors. .. Defendants ..... Mr. Anit R. Mishra for the plaintiff Mr. Vishal Phal i/by Sunita Sonawane for defendant Nos.1 and 2. ..... CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 15th SEPTEMBER, 2009. P.C. : 1. In a dispute which is between the plaintiff who is the daughter and the 1st defendant mother and other members of the family, the prayer of the plaintiff is that the parties to this suit are joint owners of the suit property (Exh."A"). She seeks partition and separate possession of her alleged 1/7th share. 2. The 1st defendant has filed an affidavit which was duly considered by this Court during the course of granting ad-interim reliefs. The statement made therein is that the suit property exclusively belongs to the 1st defendant and 2nd defendant confirms this fact. However, statement is made in para 6 of the reply that the structures on the property being occupied for a long time by the occupants so : 2 : also being dilapidated and old, the property is declared as a slum. The 1st defendant states that in the interest of the slum occupants and slum dwellers, the development of the property is entrusted to one Starwing Developers Pvt. Ltd. and there are agreements in that behalf. Mr. Phal appearing on behalf of the defendant Nos.1 and 2 sought to rely upon certain documents. However, these documents are not a part of the annexures to the reply. If, indeed any third party rights are created or the right to deal with the property is otherwise assigned by the 1st defendant, then, nothing prevents either the defendants or the assignee / developer from approaching this Court and requesting that they be impleaded as party defendants and the ad-interim order be vacated. As and when such application is made, it will be dealt with on its own merits and in accordance with law. For the present, there is no serious dispute that this motion can be made absolute in terms of the ad-interim order passed on 5th August, 2009. Accordingly, the motion is made absolute in terms the ad-interim order with liberty as above. No order as to costs. Ad-interim order to continue till hearing and final disposal of the suit but without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both sides. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)