Bombay High CourtWP/1619/2017dismissed

Smt. Shantabai Kachrulal Tekam And Others v. Nandraj S/O Jagnandan Yadav

2021-08-31Hon'Ble Shri Justice Avinash G. Gharote2 pages

3108wp1619 of 2017.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.1619/2017 Smt. Shantabai Kachrulal Tekam and others ...Versus...

Nandraj s/o Jagnandan Yadav - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court'

s or Judge'

s orders appearances, Court'

s orders or directions and Registrar'

s orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ - Shri Sawan Alaspurkar, Advocate for respondent CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATE : 31/08/2021 1.

Shri R.K. Maheshwari, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners came to be discharged by an order dated 11/12/2018 and notices were issued to the petitioners for engaging another Counsel. The notices have since been served upon the petitioners, however, none appears for the petitioners. By an order dated 13/03/2020, the position was noted and the matter was directed to be listed on 24/03/2020, as a last chance under the caption ' for dismissal', however, none appeared. The matter was thereafter also listed on 19/01/2021, whereby the office was directed to place on record as to whether the petitioner no.6 was served or not for engaging the another Counsel. The

3108wp1619 of 2017.odt office note dated 04/08/2021 records that the petitioner nos.1 to 11 are served. When the petition was listed on 20/8/2021, recording that the petitioner nos.1 to 11 are served and since nobody was appearing for that in order to afford one opportunity, the matter was listed 31/08/2021. 2.

The matter is listed today, however, none appears for the petitioners. Considering the consistent absence of the petitioners, in spite of the service of the notice to engage another Counsel, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) Wadkar