1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4553 of 2010 Mr.Walter M. D’Souza & Anr ... Petitioners versus Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and Anr. ... Respondents ... Mr.Prashant D. Patil for the petitioner. Mr.M.M.Malvankar for respondent no.1. Mr.S.L.Prabhu for respondent no.2. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 23rd June 2010 P.C. 1. The impugned order is an interlocutory order. The order does not affect the rights of the petitioner. Hence no interference is called for in exercise of a writ jurisdiction. Even otherwise, in my view, the order requires no interference on merits. 2. On an application by the respondent no.2, he was joined as a party defendant to the suit. Respondent no.2 was a whistle blower. He complained to the municipal corporation about the illegal construction and upon his complaint, corporation investigated into the matter and 2 issued a notice u/s.351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation. Respondent no.2 is a neighboring occupier. Since the action was initiated at his instance, lower court did not commit any error in allowing him to be joined as a party defendant to the suit. Writ Petition is rejected summarily. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)