1 wp-6971-10.sxw dgm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6971 OF 2010 Asset Recovery Construction Corporation India Limited .... Petitioner vs DRAT and Ors. .... Respondents Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar, Sr. Counsel with Mr. S.S.Ghosh and Mr. P.N. Kamat i/by M/s. Paras Kuhad & Associates for the petitioner. Mr. I. A. Nasikwala with Ms. Gaurangi Pujara i/by M/s.Little & co. for respondent no.2. CORAM: P. B. MAJMUDAR, & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE : 15th September, 2010 P.C.: The only grievance made by the petitioner is that even though the respondent no.2–Jay Ambey Marine Pvt. Limited has preferred an application being Misc. Application No.662/2008 in Appeal No.141/2008 for waiver of pre- deposit of decretal amount, the Tribunal is not deciding the said application one way or the other and the said application is pending for adjudication since July, 2008. The learned counsel for the respondent-Jay Ambey Marine Pvt. Limited, however, submits that the present petitioner-Asset Recovery Construction Corporation India Ltd. is not a party to the aforesaid Appeal. In our view, no such application is required to be kept pending especially regarding waiver of pre- deposit for such a long time. We, accordingly. grant liberty to the petitioner to 2 wp-6971-10.sxw make an appropriate application before the DRAT allowing him to implead as party to the said application. If, any such application is made within one week from today, the DRAT thereafter may dispose of the said application, within two weeks thereafter and after a period of two weeks, the Tribunal may dispose of the waiver application of pre-deposit submitted by the respondent-Jay Ambey Marine Pvt. Limited without any further delay. It is pointed out by Mr. Tulzapurkar, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, that because of the pendency of this application, the petitioner herein is unable to proceed further in the matter of execution of the decree. The Tribunal may therefore decide the said application in accordance with law and after the considering the contentions raised by both the sides. It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter and it is for the DRAT to consider the same. 3 The petitioner herein has also submitted an application for clarification of the order passed by the DRT on 02.07.2008 being M.A. No.217/2010 in Misc. Application No.661/2008 is pending. If such application is pending, the same be disposed of in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks from today. It is clarified that this Application may be decided in accordance with law and after hearing the concerned parties appearing in the matter. 4 The petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the above directions. 5 Writ to be sent to the Appellate Tribunal forthwith. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ( P. B. MAJMUDAR, J.)