1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 852 OF 2010. Vinod Jain and another -: versus :- Sau. Bebi Natthuji Zode and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 24 , 2010. Heard Shri A.M. Ghare, learned counsel for petitioners. Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur has rejected application by present petitioners to delete them from the array of parties. They are defendant nos. 6 and 7 in suit. Shri Ghare, learned counsel for petitioners argues that in Regular Civil Suit No.11/2008, no relief is claimed against these petitioners and these petitioners only have agreement of sale in their favour with all family members. Hence in suit for partition and separate possession filed by some family members against the other group, the petitioners are not necessary parties. He further points out that the plaintiffs have expressed readiness and willingness to execute sale deed in favour of the petitioners after they receive their due share in sale consideration. How the proceedings in Civil Suit will progress in future need not be looked into at this stage. Suit is for 2 partition and separate possession of a property which is agreed to be purchased by present petitioners, and not only the plaintiffs but the other defendants therein have also received some consideration in part from present defendants. In this situation, the view taken by the trial Court while rejecting the application of petitioners and in continuing them as parties to the suit cannot be stated to be erroneous or perverse. There is no jurisdictional error. Writ Petition is thus dismissed, with no order as to cost. JUDGE Rgd.