{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3421 OF 2011 Chandrakant Shriram Sharma Petitioner Versus The Collector, Jalgaon, District Jalgaon. Respondent Mr.S.V.Suryawanshi, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, A.G.P. for the respondent. CORAM : S.S.SHINDE, J. DATE : 22 nd November, 2011 PER COURT: 1 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.P. for the Respondent. 2 This writ petition takes exception to the order dated 2nd February, 2011, passed by 3rd Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon below Exhibit-86 in R.C.S. No.9/2003. 3 Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner invited my attention to para 3 of the application and submitted that necessary permission for constructing shopping complex was obtained from the Assistant Director, Town Planning, Jalgaon. Therefore, the plaintiff wanted to examine Assistant Director, Town Planning in support of his case, however, his application to add {2} Municipal Council, Pachora, as party Respondent in the suit, is rejected by the trial Court on the ground that completion certificate is not given by the Municipal Council, Pachora. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Municipal Council, Pachora is necessary party for proper adjudication of the suit filed by the petitioner. Therefore, he submits that the writ petition may be allowed. 4 On the other hand, learned A.G.P. appearing for Respondent – Collector, Jalgaon, submits that suit is filed in the year 2003 and application for adding Municipal Council, Pachora as party Respondent, is filed on 24.12.2010. According to the learned A.G.P., mandate of Order XVI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, states that such application to be filed within fifteen days from the date of framing of the issues and, therefore, this Court may not interfere in the impugned order. 5 I have given due consideration to the rival submissions. From perusal of the averments made in the plaint and in particular paragraph 3, it is seen that petitioner-plaintiff has specifically averred that the plaintiff has taken permission from the Assistant Director, Town Planning, Jalgaon, to built such shopping complex for commercial purpose. Therefore, in view of the averments made in paragraphs 3 and 4, the application of the petitioner-plaintiff should have been allowed by the trial Court. {3} Therefore, in my opinion, the order impugned in this petition deserves to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, same is quashed and set aside. The application filed by the petitioner for adding Municipal Council, Pachora, as party respondent stands allowed. Necessary amendment to be carried out by the petitioner- plaintiff in the suit within three weeks from today. Upon carrying out such amendment, the concerned Court to issue summons to the added Respondent. 6 Writ Petition stands disposed of in above terms. S.S.SHINDE JUDGE adb/wp342111