Dharmadhikari, J.

1. Rule. Since a short point is involved, with the consent of the parties rule is made returnable forthwith. The learned advocate for respondents waive service.

2. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners are challenging the common order passed by the learned Chairperson of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Mumbai in Misc. Appeal No.127 of 2010 and Misc.Appeal No.128 of 2010. The petitioners before us are the original appellants in this appeal whereas the respondents to this petition are the original respondents-applicants.

3. These appeals impugn the common order dated 19th May 2010 passed by the Presiding Officer of Debt Recovery Tribunal – II, for short (DRT-II), Mumbai. By this order the DRT allowed the respondents application (Exhibit 188) for amendment in the cause title of the original Application No.89 of 2005 whereas the petitioners’ application for dismissal of this original application was rejected.

4. The respondents preferred the application Exhibit 188 for amendment to the title of the said OA on the ground that Oriental Bank of Commerce filed the above OA against the petitioners-ori