IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Application No. 7169 of 1998 in Writ Petition No. 807 of 1991 1. Balkrishna Pandurang Jadhav and others ..Petitioners vs. 1. The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents and 1. Jatin Ghanyashyam Shah and another ..Applicants. Shri L.M.Acharya for petitioners. Shri P.M.Patil, A.G.P. for respondents. Shri Vijay Patil for applicants. CORAM: S.B.MHASE & CORAM: S.B.MHASE & CORAM: S.B.MHASE & D.G.KARNIK JJ. D.G.KARNIK JJ. D.G.KARNIK JJ. 20th February, 2006 20th February, 2006 20th February, 2006 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and petitioners and respondents to the main writ petition. 2. Applicants claim to have purchased the part of the property from the petitioners. The applicants, therefore, submit that they should be joined as respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners admits that the applicants have purchased part of the property but submits that some litigation is pending between the petitioners and applicants, the details of which have not been disclosed by the petitioners to him. Since the applicants are purchasers of the part of the property, in our view, it would be appropriate to join them as parties to the petition. There is one more reason to do so. The applciants have already been ordered to be joined as parties in the connected writ petition no.1265 of 1993. 3. For these reasons the Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayert clause (a). Amendment to be carried out within a period of one week. Learned counsel for the respondents waive further service. (D.G.KARNIK J.) (S.B.MHASE J.) (D.G.KARNIK J.) (S.B.MHASE J.) (D.G.KARNIK J.) (S.B.MHASE J.)