912&913-WP2334-2025+.DOC Santosh IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2334 OF 2025 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2335 OF 2025 Sarojini Balwantrao Deshmukh ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra thorugh its Principal Secretary and ors. …Respondents Mr. Surel Shah, Senior Advocate, a/w Duj Jain and Rajesh Patil, i/b Kiran Jain, for the Petitioner. Mr. Manoj Badgujar, i/b Sharmila Deshmukh, for the Respondents. CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED: 20th FEBRUARY, 2025 Order:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. The challenge in these petitions is to an order passed by the learned District Judge, Solapur, on applications preferred in the LAR No.8 of 2019 and LAR No.13 of 2020 seeking impleadment. The learned Counsel for respondent No.6 invites attention of the Court to an order passed by this Court in WP/36/2023, whereby this Court has rejected the petition by Nilakshi Subhash Patil, the daughter of the instant petitioner against an identical order of rejection of the application for impleadment in the LARs. 1/2 SANTOSH SUBHASH KULKARNI Digitally signed by SANTOSH SUBHASH KULKARNI Date: 2025.02.21 14:15:23 +0530 912&913-WP2334-2025+.DOC 3. Mr. Shah, the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner, attempted to persuade the Court to hold that the petitioner has independent rights in the suit property and the order passed by this Court in the matter of Nilakshi Patil may not bind her. 4. I am afraid to accede to this submission, the claim of Nilakshi Patil also stems from the right of Balwantrao Deshmukh, the husband of the petitioner. 5. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the challenge to the impugned order cannot be entertained. 6. While rejecting the said petition, this Court had reserved the liberty to the petitioner therein to file appropriate proceeding as may be permissible in accordance with law. 7. Petitions stand dismissed with liberty to file appropriate proceeding as permissible in law. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 2/2