State Bank Of India Throug Its Branch Manater Andur v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1399.20CA vdk

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1399 OF 2020 IN WRIT PETITION NO.8472 OF 2018 State Bank of India Through its' Branch Manager .....Applicant

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra and others ..... Respondents .......

Mr. Sunil A. Kulkarni, Advocate for the applicant -respondent no.2 in writ petition Mr. A. V. Deshmukh, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent - State Mr. M. R. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent no. 2 Mr. Anand Kawre, Advocate h/f Mr. Y. P. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent no. 3 .......

[CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH AND B. U. DEBADWAR , JJ.] DATE : 6 th February, 2020 ORDER :

1.

Learned counsel for respondent no.2 refers to that he could not attend the matter and he had already filed leave note as he was engaged in marriage of his son. Learned counsel for the applicant states that warrant issued to applicant -

1399.20CA respondent no. 2 in writ petition, pursuant to order dated 2nd December, 2019, has yet not been served on applicant - respondent no. 2 in writ petition. Learned counsel submits, in the circumstances, applicant - respondent no. 2 in writ petition could not remain present before the court and expresses regret over non-appearance on concerned date and tenders apology. Learned counsel states that applicant was personally present before this court yesterday.

2.

In view of aforesaid, we deem it appropriate to recall order dated 2nd December, 2019.

3.

Civil application is, as such, allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and is disposed of.

[B. U. DEBADWAR] [SUNIL P. DESHMUKH] JUDGE JUDGE vdk/1399.20CA