1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1421 OF 2010 (Arvind Amrutlal Bhatti vs. Bharti Paresh Vaishnav & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. MARCH 29, 2010. Shri Kashid, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that defendant No. 1 has deliberately allowed suit to proceed ex parte and present respondent No. 5 though aware of the litigation did not intervene till last moment, only to delay the disposal of Civil Suit. He points out that no express relief as such has been asked for against Respondent No. 5. Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No. 5, on the other hand, states that Respondent No. 5 is the present owner and he has purchased property from defendant No. 1 who has chosen not to contest the suit. After getting knowledge thereof and after receipt of documents, application under Order 1, Rule 10(2) of Civil Procedure Code has been filed and it has been rightly allowed by the trial Court. With the assistance of both learned counsel, I have perused the order. The trial Court has considered relevant facts 2 and it has found that present Respondent No. 5 is interested in subject matter and therefore it is essential to add him as party. When Respondent No.1 (defendant No.1) is not contesting the suit and title documents are executed in favour of Respondent No.5, I do not find anything wrong with the application of mind by trial Court. However, considering the anxiety of Shri Kashid, learned counsel, proceedings in Regular Civil Suit No. 452 of 2006 are expedited. The Court below shall attempt to decide the same as early as possible and in any case by 31st March 2011. With this direction, writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.