- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.44 OF 2008 Gajanfar Rafik Ahmed Mirajkar .. Petitioner vs District Court,Raigad-Alibag & ors .. Respondents .. Shri Gajanfar Rafik Ahmed Mirajkar,Petitioner-in- person Ms.G.P.Mulekar AGP for State of Maharashtra. With CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 36 OF 2008 in MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.44 OF 2008 Gajanfar Rafik Ahmed Mirajkar ... Petitioner vs District Court, Raigad -Alibag & ors.. Respondents CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR,C.J. DATED: 26TH JUNE, 2009 P.C. 1. I have heard the petitioner. Certain grievances have been raised in the present petition. It is stated that case of the petitioner has not been heard and the case should be transferred from the Court of Mr.D.B.Gaikwad, Additional District Judge. As far as Mr.D.B.Gaikwad is concerned, he has already been transferred and therefore, that prayer does not survive for consideration. - 2 - 2. As far as the hearing of Civil Appeal No.259 of 2006 is concerned, it is stated to be pending in the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Raigad. The applicant is granted liberty to mention the matter before that Court. If such a mention or request for an early hearing is made, I have no doubt in my mind that the appellate Court would not only grant early hearing to the petitioner but, would also decide the matter on merits expeditiously and in any case not later than three months. 3. Application is disposed of accordingly. CHIEF JUSTICE - 3 -