1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1025 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO.224 OF 1961 Madhusudanlal Narayanlal Pittie ...Plaintiff Vs. Maheshchanraj Agarwal & Ors. ...Defendants And Mohamed Adil Attarwalla ...Applicant Mr.N.A.Shah i/b. Y.R.Mishra for Plaintiff A.Y.Bookwala for Counsel i/b. D.J.Kamdin & Co. for Defendants 1C to 1D CORAM: SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED: 23RD APRIL, 2008 P.C. 1. The Suit which was being filed 47 years ago is for partition between family members. The suit properties which are admitted between the parties are shown at Exhibit- A to the plaint. I am told that most of the movable properties have been distributed between the co-owners. There are 9 immovable properties. Preliminary Decree has been passed in 1965, as the shares of the parties have been ascertained. A private Court Receiver has been appointed since 1967. He inter alia collects rents from the tenants of 2 the properties. 2. The Applicant claims to be one of the 128 tenants in property No.2 in Exhibit- A to the plaint which consists of 15 buildings having 75 flats. Such a tenant claims to be a party Defendant. His claim is based on the fact that the Court Receiver, who is private Receiver, appointed in collusion, has been harassing the tenants including him. He has applied for joining that Court Receiver in his suit to be filed in proper Court. 3. The Applicant has also sought to apply by way of a Judges Order for suing the private Receiver. That application is pending. 4. The Applicant is neither a proper nor a necessary party to the suit which is between the co-owners. 5. I have been shown the judgment in the case of Smt.Monomoyee Barmani Vs. Smt. Upeswari Barmani, AIR 1994 Gauhati 18 , which is also a partition suit. It has been held that only the parties who are entitled to a share on partition are proper parties to such suit. A party who is neither entitled to any share nor interested in any share is not a proper party. The presence of the applicant will not 3 help the Court in determining the issue, if any, between the parties for passing a final decree between the co-owners for partition. Hence, the application is dismissed. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)