-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPL. NO. 391 OF 2010 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 425 OF 1993 Vilas V. Wadekar & Ors. ...Appellants. Versus Padmkar B. Wadekar & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. Madhav Jamdar for the appellants. Mr. S. M. Oak for R-1. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : July 29, 2011. P. C. : 1. This civil application is taken out for impleading respondent nos.2 & 3 as party respondents in above second appeal. Relief of interim injunction restraining the original respondent and added respondents from creating third party interest/right in the suit property and carrying out any construction is also claimed. 2. The appellants are the original plaintiffs. Suit is for partition and separate possession. Suit is decreed by the trial Court. However, appellate court, at the instance of defendant, reversed this decree on the ground that the appellants’ suit is not within limitation. Therefore, present second appeal is filed by the original plaintiffs. srp -: 2 :- 3. Second appeal was filed on 11/11/1992 and same was admitted on 24/9/1993. However, in the meanwhile on 7/9/1993 respondent no.1 sold out suit property to respondent nos. 2 & 3 by a registered sale deed. In above circumstances, in my opinion, respondent nos.2 & 3 would be the proper parties to the aforesaid second appeal. 4. None appears on behalf of respondent nos.2 & 3, though they are served. Mr. Oak appears on behalf of respondent no. 1, however, he states that he has no instructions in the matter. 5. In the circumstances, civil application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (c). Necessary amendment shall be carried out within the period of two weeks from today. After the amendment is carried out, Office shall issue notice to the respondents returnable on 26/8/2011. In the meanwhile, respondents shall not create any third party rights/interests in the suit property. Civil application stands disposed of. (Ranjit More, J.)