:1: :1: :1: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6541 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 6544 OF 2007 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s Orders Orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.M.D.Modagi i/by. Mr.Sagar Joshi, Adv. for the petitioners. Mr.Ajay Gadkari, Adv. for respondent no.2. Mr.P.R.Gyani for Respondent no.2. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED: 10TH MARCH, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. These two Writ petitions are directed against an order passed on an Application which has been preferred by Respondent no.2 Santu Trimbak Gaikar (third party in Reg.Civil suit No. 157 of 1999 and Reg.Civil Suit No.59 of 1999). Both are pending on the file of the Learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kalyan :2: :2: :2: and both have been filed by the present petitioners for possession. 2. Respondent No.2-Third Party made an Application for impleading himself as a party Defendant to this Suit which Application having been allowed, the present petitions. 3. After they were argued for some time, Mr.Gyani appearing for Respondent no.2 upon instructions makes a statement that Respondent no.2 withdraws each of the Applicantions in the Trial Court with liberty to adopt appropriate proceedings. Mr.Gyani, states that there is pending litigation between the petitioner and Respondent no.2, being Civil Revision Application No. 144 of 2007. Mr.Gyani, states that the withdrawal of these Applications before the Trial Court is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of Respondent no.2 in this Civil Revision Application. Further, he seeks a clarification and prays that if Respondent no.2 is summoned as witness in the :3: :3: :3: Trial Court, then, withdrawal of these Applications should not be a bar or impediment for the Respondent no.2 deposing before the Trial Court. 4. Writ petition is disposed off in the light of the statements of Mr.Gyani. Since the Applications for joinder in the Trial Court made by Respondent no.2 are withdrawn, the impugned orders do not survive and are quashed and set aside. However, these withdrawals will not prejudice the rights and contentions of the petitioner and Respondent no.2 in C.R.A.No.114 of 2007. Similarly, if the Original Defendant to the Suits in the Trial Court desire to summon the Respondent no.2, Santu, as their witness in the proceedings, the withdrawal does not preclude them from so applying and the said Santu, from deposing and producing any documents. With these clarifications, these Writ petitions are disposed off. ********