Sudhir Agarwal v. Mrs.Ami Agarwal And ANR.

P-1.docx

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVISION APPLICATION NO.348 OF 2025 Sudhir Agarwal ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra & Anr.

....Respondents ___________________ [ Ms. Sunaina Chakravarty, for the Petitioner.

___________________ CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.

DATED : 17th JULY, 2025 P.C. :

1) Learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that, the State of Maharashtra is not a necessary party. However, in the copy, which is filed before the Court, State of Maharashtra is shown to be party Respondent. Neither in their own copy or in the copy of the Respondents, the State of Maharashtra is made party. Therefore, she seeks leave to delete State of Maharashtra from the array of Respondent, which is wrongly shown. 2) Leave granted.

3) Amendment to be carried out during the course of the day. [MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.] ___________________________________________________________ KARTIKEYA GOTI Page No.1 of 1