1 917-ca-3271-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3271 OF 2025 IN CA/11377/2024 Sow. Vidya Suresh Kulkarni VERSUS Shankar Mansingh Madare And Others ... Mr. R. R. Dhongde h/f Mr. S. S. Kulkarni, Advocate for Applicant Mr. Pallod, Advocate for Respondents ….. CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. DATED : 08TH OCTOBER, 2025 ORDER :- . Heard Mr. R. R. Dhongde h/f Mr. S. S. Kulkarni and Mr. Pallod, learned Advocate for the respondents. 2. In the morning session, Mr. S. S. Kulkarni, learned Advocate for the applicant has argued this Civil Application pointing out that during the proceeding, respondent no.7 is expired and the application is filed by the legal representatives of the deceased respondent no.7. 3. The proposed respondent nos.7-A to 7-D represent the rights/liabilities of respondent no.7 and as such it is endeavour that respondent nos.7-A to 7-D need to be arrayed as party respondents to the Civil Revision Application. 2025:BHC-AUG:28749 2 917-ca-3271-2025 4. Mr. Pallod, learned Advocate in all fairness places his no objection to allow the application in so far as it merely seeks to bring legal representatives of deceased respondent no.7 on record. 5. In view of this, I pass following order: ORDER a. Civil Application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’. b. Necessary amendment be carried out within four weeks from today. c. Upon carrying out amendment, office to issue notice to the newly added respondents made returnable on 19.11.2025. d. The matter be listed after service of notice is complete. In the meantime, applicant shall take recourse to the provisions enumerated in Chapter II of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, corresponding to the stage and requirement of matter. ( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. ) Rushikesh/2025