Bhairu Vishwanath Salunke And Another v. Hanumant Rama Bhojae

{1} wp3891-16 drp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3891 OF 2016 Bhairu Vishwanath Salunke and Another PETITIONERS

VERSUS

Hanumant Rama Bhojae RESPONDENT .......

Mr. Shailendra S. Gangakhedkar, Advocate for petitioners .......

[CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.] DATE : 5 th APRIL, 2016 ORDER :

1.

Heard learned advocate for the petitioners.

2.

Grievance, in short, is that the order purportedly impugned in the present writ petition dated 5th October, 2015 ought not to have been passed, for, the record amply bears out that the defendants have duly complied with all the conditions under the order dated 4th March, 2013, upon Exhibit-127 and as a matter of fact on the day on which application Exhibit-136 had been filed by the plaintiffs, on the very day, a pursis Exhibit-135 had been filed on record referring to the address of the examiner. 3.

In the circumstances, it is apprehended that 'further

{2} wp3891-16 orders', as referred to in the impugned order may be order against the interest of petitioner. The apprehension, on the face of it, is a conjecture.

4.

The petitioners can very well explain the position as is borne out according to their contentions from the record and seek proper orders having regard to the record. Exhibit-136 be considered by the court upon hearing the parties. 5.

Writ petition, with aforesaid, stands disposed of. [SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.] drp/wp3891-16