Subhash Maleshapp Muglikar v. Ramkrishna Nandlal Lahoti And ORS

1 RA(Civil) No.96/12

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO. 96 OF 2012 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 309 OF 2003 Subhash S/o Maleshappa Mugalikar .. Petitioner Vs.

Ramkrishna S/o Nandlal Lahoti and others .. Respondents ---- None for the petitioner Ms. Vanita Sangole, Advocate i/b. Mrs. M.A. Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent no. 1 Mr. G.R. Syed, Advocate for the respondent no. 2 to 10 None present for respondent nos. 11 and 12, though served Respondent Nos. 13 and 14 dismissed as per Courts order dated 13.06.2012 ---- CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J.

DATE : 15/07/2015 ORAL ORDER :

None appears for the petitioner.

2.

The earlier order dated 3rd July, 2015 would show that nobody has appeared on that day also. It is also noted that the review application was already dismissed as against some of the respondents. 3.

Mr. G.R. Syed, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 to 10 submits that in view of the

2 RA(Civil) No.96/12 judgment delivered in the Civil Revision Application, which is sought to be reviewed, the possession is already taken by the respondents.

4.

In the absence of the respondent nos. 13 and 14, regarding whom already the review application is dismissed, the review application cannot proceed. 5.

The Review Application is therefore dismissedin-default. [M.T. JOSHI] JUDGE arp/