1 wp10610.10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10610 OF 2010 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mr. C.R. Thorat, Advocate for petitioner. Mrs. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mr. A.K. Gawali, Advocate for respondent no. 3. 1. Heard Advocates Mr. Thorat for petitioner, Mr. Gawali for respondent no.3 and the learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2. The order passed by the District Consumer Forum was already assailed before this Court by filing Writ Petition no. 7677 of 2010 by respondent no. 4 society. In similar situation, this Court has refused to interfere in the matter in writ jurisdiction. The said order is passed on 22.03.2011 in Writ Petition no. 489 of 2011. 2. Advocate Mr. Thorat for petitioner contends that Writ Petition no. 7677 of 2010 has been dismissed in default. However that will not make any difference. According to Advocate Mr. Gawali, the respondent no.3 before this Court who approached District Consumer Forum is not a member of the co-operative society and he 2 wp10610.10 also wants to distinguish the view taken by this Court on 22.03.2011. 3. As this Court already refused to interfere in similar facts in writ jurisdiction, therefore it is not necessary to go into the merits of controversy in the present matter. 4. Advocate Mr. Thorat for petitioner request for continuation of interim relief already operating in the matter. He states that in earlier matter bearing Writ Petition no. 489 of 2011 this Court has continued that interim relief and permitted the petitioner to approach the State Forum within that time. Advocate Mr. Gawali is opposing the request. He points out that the impugned orders are passed about two years back. 5. As the interim order has been continued in Writ Petition no. 489 of 2011, the same shall be continued here also for a period of four weeks and shall cease to operate automatically thereafter. It is made clear that the State Forum shall decide the issue of limitation independently on its own merits. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 24.03.2011 gas/wp10610.10