1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.197 OF 2010 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2657 OF 2006 IN SUIT NO. 4579 OF 1996 Jagdish Umeshchandra Joshi & Anr, .... Plaintiffs V/s. 1.Dr.Niranjan U. Joshi & Ors. .... Defendants And Nishant Sudarshan Joshi .... Applicant WITH SUIT NO. 137 OF 1988 Shehnas ftab Kapadia .... Plaintiff V/s. Smt.Tarabai W/o. Umeshchandra M. Joshi & Ors. .... Defendants WITH SUIT NO. 2623 OF 1988 Mridulla Jyoti Rao .... Plaintiff V/s. T.V. Joshi & Ors. .... Defendants ..... Mr. G.B. Kedia, for Plaintiffs. Mr. Chirag Balsara, i/b. Mulla & Mulla, for Defendant No.1. Mrs. Vijaya V. Divekar, i/b. Divekar & Co., for Defendant No.2. 2 Mr. S.S. Jinsiwale, for Defendant No.3. Ms. Kavita Shah, for Defendant No.5. Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni, Senior Counsel,a/w. Ms. Dipti Nazreth, i/b. T. Jariwala & Ass., for Defendant No.6. Mr. M.P. Narayanswamy, for Defendant No.7. ..... CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATE : 16TH FEBRUARY, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the Plaintiffs and Defendants. 2. The above chamber summons is taken out by the Applicant for direction to the plaintiffs to join him as a party defendant no.9 in the above suit. The above suit is filed for partition and separate possession. The plaintiffs and the defendants each, admittedly have 1/10th share in the suit property. The Applicant is the son of defendant no.2. The Applicant is not entitled to any share in the suit property, during the lifetime of his father-defendant no.2. The presence of the applicant to decide the controversy in the suit is not necessary. 3 The Applicant is also not proper party to the suit. The Chamber Summons is, therefore, stands dismissed. (R. V. MORE, J.)