MP 1 WP2612_11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2612 OF 2011 Smt. Omavati Ghanashyam Agarwal ... Petitioner Versus Shri Shrikisan Ramchandra Agarwal and others ... Respondents Mr. A. P. Vanarse for Petitioner. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. MONDAY, APRIL 11, 2011 P. C. : Leave to amend. 2. The petitioner objects to the order dated 20th December 2010, vide which the learned Trial Court has permitted the respondent No. 1 to withdraw the suit. 3. The respondent No. 1 had filed the suit against the defendants - respondent Nos. 2 and 3 herein, challenging a notice issued by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 under Section 478 of the B.P.M.C. Act, 1949. 4. It is the contention of the present petitioner that in the said suit, an application was filed by the father of the petitioner for joining him as a party defendant. Since the father expired during the pendency of the suit, the petitioner brought himself on record as legal heir of the father. It is the contention of the petitioner that since the petitioner had a share in the suit property, the suit could not have been withdrawn without the petitioner's application being decided. MP 2 WP2612_11 5. The tenor of the plaint would reveal that the relief, specifically claimed, is against the municipal corporation. If according to the respondent No. 1 - plaintiff, if his grievance is satisfied and if he does not wish to prosecute the suit against the defendants, he cannot be compelled to continue with the suit. In any case, the suit is withdrawn without any liberty. If the petitioner has any claim against the respondent No. 1, he can very well take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 6. Rejected with aforesaid orders. (B.R. GAVAI, J)