ash 1 wp-7453.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7453 OF 2010 Shri Haresh Nagji Chheda. .. Petitioner Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation. .. Respondent -- Shri Atul Damale with Shri Vivek Kantawala and Ms Sneha Nanandkar i/by Vivek kantawala & Co. for the Petitioner. Shri S.R. Page for the Respondent. -- CORAM ; A.S. OKA, J DATED : 4TH JULY, 2011 P.C. . Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that after the impugned order was passed, the Petitioner has learnt the names of five officers of the Respondent, apart from Shri Santosh Kumar, who have allegedly committed a breach of the order of temporary injunction. He states that the only prayer in the Application at Exhibit – 44 was for a direction to the Respondent to furnish the names and addresses of the 10 employees who had allegedly entered the suit property and had committed breach of order of temporary injunction. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that as ash 2 wp-7453.10 the Petitioner already knows the names of five officers, the Petitioner does not desire to press the application at Exhibit 44 and he may be permitted to implead the said five officers as parties to the Application at Exhibit 29 under Rule 2A of Order XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 2. The entire exercise was required to be done as the Petitioner wanted the Respondent to disclose the names of its officers who have allegedly committed breach of injunction. Now the Petitioner is not pressing the said Application. In view of this statement, the impugned order will have to be set aside and permission will have to be granted to the Petitioner to implead the five officers viz. (i) Sanjay Sharma, (ii) Rajeev Saxena, (iii) Renold Mathew, (iv) Sanjay Sud and (v) Shri Gokhale as the parties to the Application under Rule 2A of Order XXXIX of the said Code. It is obvious that the issue whether the said officers have committed any breach of the order of injunction is kept open. 3. Hence, I pass the following order:- (a) Only in view of the statement made by the Petitioner that he does not want to prosecute the Application at Exhibit 44, the impugned order dated 5 th August, 2010 is ash 3 wp-7453.10 quashed and set aside and the Application at Exhibit-44 stands dismissed as withdrawn. (b) It will be open for the Petitioner to implead the aforesaid five officers as the parties to the Application under Rule 2A of Order XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which is at Exhibit-29. (c) The issue whether the officers proposed to be added as the parties have committed any breach of the order of interim injunction is expressly kept open. (d) The Writ Petition is disposed of on above terms with no orders as to costs. (e) It is obvious that ad-interim relief granted by this Court stands vacated. (f) Civil Application No.313 of 2011 does not survive and the same is disposed of. ( A.S. OKA, J )