IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Chamber Summons No.1607 of 2006 in Suit No. 231 of 2005 Mr.Mehul Ishwarlal Shrimankar ..Plaintiff vs. 1. Mr.Kaushik Shrimankar and others ..Defendants Mr.P.P.Lajas i/b M/s Beri and Co. for plaintiff. Mr.Jamshed Ansari i/b S.Mohammadbhai and Co. for defendant no.6 CORAM S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 8th April, 2008 8th April, 2008 8th April, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. In the peculiar facts of this case and when the dispute is between the family members and one of the immovable properties are being claimed to be mortgaged in favour of the Union Bank of India, it would be appropriate and in the interest if the Union Bank of India is impleaded as a party Defendant to the suit. The Union Bank of India does not dispute the proceedings, copies of which are annexed as Exhibits A and B to the affidavit in support of the chamber summons. In fact, there is no opposition from the Union Bank of India to the averment that it is a necessary party and its presence would assist this Court in completely and effectively resolving the controversy between the family members. Chamber summons is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). Amendment to be carried out within a period of two weeks from today. Copy of the amended plaint be served on the newly added defendant within a period of four weeks thereafter. Written Statement by newly added defendant within 4 weeks of receipt of amended plaint. M/s S.Mohammedbhai and Co. waive service of writ of summons on behalf of the newly added defendant. All contentions on merits are kept open. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)