Bombay High CourtWP/3486/2016disposed offdismissed for default

Jilani Yusuf Qureshi And Another v. Ajmat Shahin Abdu Hanifa Mohd Iqbaal And Others

2017-12-11Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge2 pages

*1* 11wp3483a3486o16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3483 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.9243 OF 2017 IN WP/3483/2016 AJMAL SHAHIN ABU HANIFA MOHD IQBAIL MAJID AND OTHERS

VERSUS

JILANI YUSUF QURESHI AND OTHERS WITH WRIT PETITION NO.3486 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.9244 OF 2017 IN WP/3486/2016 JILANI YUSUF QURESHI AND ANOTHER.

-VERSUSAJMAT SHAHIN W/O ABDU HANIFA MOHD. IQBAAL AND OTHERS. ...

Advocate for the Petitioners in WP 3483/2016 and for Respondent Nos.1 to 8 in WP 3486/2016 : Shri Chapalgaonkar S.G.. Advocate for the Petitioners in WP 3486/2016 and for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in WP 3483/2016 : Shri N.J.Patil.

...

CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATE :- 11th December, 2017 Per Court:

It is informed that the Power of Attorney in favour of Sayyed Kausarpasha s/o Sayyed Majhar Jahagirdar, who was representing Petitioner Nos.1 to 8 in Writ Petition No.3483/2016 and Respondent

*2* 11wp3483a3486o16 Nos.1 to 8 in Writ Petition No.3486/2016, has been cancelled and an independent Power of Attorney document is executed by the said parties in favour of Petitioner No.8 (Mohammad Kutub Ali Khan s/o Mohammad Taufiq Ali Khan) in Writ Petition No.3483/2016 and Respondent No.8 in Writ Petition No.3486/2016, who is present in the Court in person. Mohammad Kutub Ali Khan (Petitioner No.8) is identified by the learned Advocates in the Court. Petitioner No.8 submits that as the Power of Attorney in favour of Sayyed Kausarpasha has been cancelled, both these petitions can be disposed of.

Shri Patil, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners in the second petition submits that the said Petitioners desire to withdraw the petition.

Considering the above, the first petition is disposed of with liberty to Sayyed Kausarpasha to take recourse to the remedy as may be permissible in law. All contentions of the litigating sides are kept open in that context. The second petition is also disposed of as having been withdrawn on instructions.

In the light of the disposal of the petitions, the pending Civil Applications do not survive and are also disposed of. kps (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)