IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIGINAL SIDE. ORIGINAL SIDE. ORIGINAL SIDE. WRIT PETITION NO. 3354 OF 1991. WRIT PETITION NO. 3354 OF 1991. WRIT PETITION NO. 3354 OF 1991. M/s Urmila & Co.(P) Ltd. ..Petitioner. vs. Union of India & ors. ..Respondents. None for the petitioner. Shri A.S. Rao for the respondents. CORAM: V.C.DAGA & CORAM: V.C.DAGA & CORAM: V.C.DAGA & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATED: 06-04-2005. DATED: 06-04-2005. DATED: 06-04-2005. P.C. 1. It appears that in view of the order passed by this Court dated 3.12.1991, the adjudicating authority was permitted to adjudicate and pass final assessment order. By this time, the order must have been passed. That is why the petitioner seems to be not interested in prosecuting its petition. However, no material is on record to infer either way. Shri Rao is also not in a position to throw any light on the subsequent events. 2. Be that as it may. Since nobody is present on behalf of the petitioner, the petition is liable to be dismissed for want of prosecution. In the result petition is dismissed in default with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)