: 1 : 3255-11-wp=.sxw USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3255 OF 2011 Arjun Mangal Wayale & Ors. .. Petitioners v/s. M/s. Castle Enterprises & Ors. .. Respondents ......... Mr. P.R. Arjunwadkar for the petitioners Mr. Sagar Joshi for respondent nos. 1 to 4. ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J DATE : 14th OCTOBER,2011. P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel on both sides. The petitioners had impleaded three persons namely Mr. Sahebrao Trimbak Chavan, Sunil Sahebrao Chavan and Milind Sahebrao Chavan as defendant nos. 6, 7 and 8. 2. After the suit summons was served upon these three persons, who are respondents before this Court as respondent nos. 6, 7 and 8 filed the : 2 : 3255-11-wp=.sxw application before the learned 2nd Joint, Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kalyan, Dist. Thane before whom the suit was pending for deletion of names of these three persons as per the provisions of Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code. That application dated 18th November, 2010 was allowed and names of original defendant nos. 6, 7 and 8 were ordered to be deleted. This order dated 18th November, 2010 is challenged in this petition. 3. I have heard learned advocates on both sides. I have perused the text of the plaint. After reading the text of the plaint, it is clear that except impleading these three persons in the plaint as defendants and seeking prayers against them specifically with reference to prayer clauses 8, there is no other material on the basis of which it can be held that the involvement of these three persons even prima-facie is not made out. In order to seek appropriate reliefs against these three persons it would necessary for the petitioners to make appropriate averments. Hence, granting of the said application is required to be upheld. Consequently, no interference is required in the impugned order. : 3 : 3255-11-wp=.sxw 4. In view of the above, petition is required to be dismissed at the stage of admission. Hence, following order is passed. ORDER (i) Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission with no order as to costs. (ii)After the aforesaid order is passed, learned advocate Mr. Arjunwadkar appearing for the petitioner sought liberty of this Court to file an application for amendment of the plaint so as to incorporate appropriate averments against petitioner nos. 6, 7 and 8 to involve them properly in the present suit and seek appropriate relief. In my view, there is no need to grant specific liberty. It will be open for the petitioner to take steps as they may be advised. (iii) Needless to mention that if such application for amendment is filed, it shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of law. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)