1 WP NO.7293 /11 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7293 OF 2011 Kamalakar Vasant Pathare : Petitioner versus The Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gr.Mumbai : Respondent. Mrs.Anjali Helekar for the Petitioner. Mr.R A Thorat for the Respondent No.2 CORAM:- R M SAVANT, J DATED :- OCTOBER 07, 2011. P.C. 1 The above Petition takes exception to the order dated 12th August 2011 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court (Dindoshi Division) Bombay by which order the Chamber Summons No.456 of 2011 filed by the Respondent No.2 herein came to be allowed and resultantly the Respondent No.2 was directed to be joined as a party Defendant to the suit in question. 2 At the threshold it is required to be noted that the main substantive relief sought in the suit is an omnibus relief against the 2 WP NO.7293 /11 Defendant No.1 to the suit i.e. the Municipal Corporation, Greater Mumbai The relief is in respect of the Development Right Certificate (DRC) to be issued in respect of the properties in question. In respect of the said properties, the Respondent No.2 claims to have certain rights based on the documents which he had annexed to the Chamber Summons which he had filed for his impleadment. It is the claim of the Respondent No.2 that the process of issuing DRC to the Respondent No.2 is complete. However, since there is an injunction which is operating against the Respondent No. 1/Corporation that the DRC has not been issued to it. The trial Court considered the material which was placed on record by the Respondent No. 2 and in view of the fact that since it is the case of the Respondent No.1 Corporation that the DRC is to be issued to the Respondent No.2, the trial Court allowed the Chamber Summons No.456 of 2011 by holding that the Respondent No.2 was a necessary party to the said suit. 3 In so far as claim of the Respondent No.2 to the DRC based on the documents is concerned, the trial court has rightly observed that the same would be considered at the time of trial. 4 In my view, the impugned order dated 12/08/2011 calls for no 3 WP NO.7293 /11 interference in the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The above Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. (R M SAVANT, J)