Arun Sales Corporation, Thr. Proprietor, Arun Balmukund Sharma And ANR. v. Sunita Nainsukh Banawat

2025:BHC-NAG:1225 1 wp 660.2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

Writ Petition No. 660 of 2025 [Arun Sales Corporation, through its Proprietor Arun Balmukund Sharma and anr. ..vs.. Sunita Nainsukh Banawat] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. C. N. Wankhade, Advocate for the petitioners through video conference CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE J.

DATED : 07-02-2025 Heard.

2.

The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 9-8-2024 passed below Exhibit 31 by Civil Judge Senior Division, Akola in Special Civil Suit No. 29/2021 thereby permitting the respondent - original plaintiff to add Hukumchand @ Mahesh S/o Mohan Bothra as party defendant.

3.

Having heard Mr. C. N. Wankhade, learned counsel for the petitioners, it transpires that the petitioner in written statement pleaded that Mr. Bothra is necessary party. Accordingly, the trial Court has formulated the issue of nonjoinder of necessary party. 4.

In context with above, the respondent filed application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to add Mr. Bothra as party defendant. The trial Court noted that accounts relating to the dispute were settled by Mr. Bothra and in context thereof and in the light of pleadings before the Court, the trial Court allowed the application.

5.

Thus, it appears that Mr. Bothra is necessary party to the suit and accordingly, the respondent has filed the application. The findings of the trial Court appears to be in

2 wp 660.2025.odt consonance with material placed before it. No interference is, therefore, called for in the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. The petition is dismissed in limini. (Anil L. Pansare, J.) wasnik