1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1024 OF 2009 M/s. Krishna Enterprises & Ors. ..Petitioners. v/s. Development Credit Bank Ltd. & anr. ..Respondents. WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.143 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1024 OF 2009 M/s. Krishna Enterprises & Ors. ..Petitioners. v/s. Development Credit Bank Ltd. & anr. ..Respondents. And Krimpex Synthetics Ltd. ..Applicant. WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.144 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1024 OF 2009 M/s. Krishna Enterprises & Ors. ..Petitioners. v/s. Development Credit Bank Ltd. & anr. ..Respondents. And 2 Alpha Omega(Diagnostics) India Ltd. ..Applicant. Mr.J.P.Sen a/w. Mehul Shah i/b. A.G.Shah for petitioners. Mr.Virag Tulzapurkar a/w Sheetal Shah i/b. Mehta & Girdharlal for intervenors. Mr.P.K.Samdani a/w Vinod Kothari i/b. Apex Law Partners for Respondent No.2. CORAM:- SWATANTER KUMAR,CJ. AND A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED :- AUGUST 4, 2009. P.C. 1. There were two applications filed before the Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Mumbai. One for impleadment as applicants and the other application was filed by the Respondent praying for inspection of the documents such as Assignment Agreement dated 13th March, 2008, Deed of Trust dated 11th March, 2009 etc.. By order dated 29th January, 2009, the Application for inspection of two documents was allowed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, II, Mumbai, against which, an Appeal was filed, being Misc.Appeal No.46 of 2009, which came to be disposed of by order dated 17th April, 2009. In the said Appeal, the Appellate Tribunal passed an order directing that the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Mumbai shall dispose of the Application of the proposed Applicants dated 24/9/2008 and if they are 3 impleaded in the case, then the order dated 29/1/2009 shall stand revived and then inspection be furnished; even gave liberty to the appellant to move for modification of the impugned order dated 29/1/2009. 2. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. The Application for impleadment has been moved as the Applicants claim to be the assignee of the debt and thus they were necessary party to the proceedings. Inspection sought, which was allowed by the DRT is of the Deed of Assignment and Deed of Trust, which are the foundation for that claim. 3. We find that these applications are only delaying the principal proceedings and neither serves the purpose of justice, much less ends of justice. Application for impleadment though has not been specifically considered by the DRT and has been kept pending, directly and indirectly inspection of two documents are allowed. Order challenged in the present Writ Petition essentially refers to both aspects and we are of the considered view that the Applicants being the Assignee of the Trust deed are necessary party of the proceedings. Therefore, Asset Reconstruction Company(India) Ltd. be ordered to be impleaded as party and inspection as prayed for by 4 them should also be provided. 4. Thus, we dispose of this Writ Petition with direction that there shall be impleadment of applicants and inspection of the documents of the Trust Deed and Deed of Assignment. This order is passed without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. They will be at liberty to raise all contentions on merits. 5. Petition disposed of accordingly. Amendment be carried out within four weeks and inspection be provided within the same period. 6. In view of disposal of the Petition, nothing survives in the Chamber Summons. The same are disposed of accordingly. CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.KHANWILKAR, J