Mohan Maruti Jadhav And ANR. v. Kisan Maruti Jadhav And ANR.

1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.738 OF 2014 Mohan Maruti Jadhav ....

Applicant Vs.

Kisan Maruti Jadhav & Ors.

....

Respondents None for the Applicant.

Mr. Prabhanjan Gujar, Advocate for Respondents No.1 and 2. Coram:

Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota, J.

Date :

4th February, 2015.

P.C. :

The applicant and advocate are absent, though called out twice. The application is, therefore, dismissed for default. (Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota, J.)

2/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.738 OF 2014 Mohan Maruti Jadhav ....

Applicant Vs.

Kisan Maruti Jadhav & Ors.

....

Respondents Mr. V.V. Purwant, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Prabhanjan Gujar, Advocate for Respondents No.1 and 2. Coram:

Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota, J.

Date :

4th February, 2015.

P.C. :

On the oral request of Mr. Purwant, the learned advocate for the applicant, the Civil Application is restored to file. Heard the advocates.

The only ground set out in the application for expeditious hearing is that the pendency of the appeal is an obstruction for hearing of Regular Civil Suit No.183 of 2003. Mr. Purwant states that the learned Judge has expressed an opinion that as long as the appeal is pending, he cannot hear subsequent suit.

Mr. Purwant has not shown how the two matters are connected to each other. In any case, considering the old

3/3 pendency of the matters, hearing of the Second Appeal cannot be expedited. Hence, the Civil Application is dismissed. (Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota, J.)