Bombay High CourtCRA/182/2010disposed offdismissed for default

Banubai Vanabai Dayaram Pachpande And ORS v. Kashinath Mulidhar Patil L.Rs. Kaushalya Kashinath Patil And ORS

2015-03-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice M.T. Joshi2 pages

1 9-cra182-10.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 182 OF 2010 WITH CA/2268/2013 IN CRA/182/2010 BANUBAI VANABAI DAYARAM PACHPANDE AND ORS.

VERSUS

KASHINATH MULIDHAR PATIL L.RS. KAUSHALYA KASHINATH PATIL AND ORS.

-- None for applicants Mr.Girish Rane, advocate for respondent no.1-D -- CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J.

DATE : MARCH 26, 2015 PER COURT :

None present for the applicants.

2] Mr.Rane, learned counsel for respondent no.1D submits that in fact, present revision application has become infructuous due to dismissal of the Second Appeal itself.

3] In view of absence of learned counsel for the revision applicant for last two dates, without

2 9-cra182-10.odt going into the statement of Mr.Rane, the revision application is dismissed for want of prosecution, without any order as to costs.

4] In view of dismissal of revision application, Civil Application does not survive and stands disposed of.

[M.T. JOSHI, J.] kbp