1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.118 OF 2009 M/s Purushottam Traders Pvt.Ltd..... Applicants & Ors. Vs. M/s Universal Ferro & Allied .... Respondents Chemicals Ltd. & Ors. Mr.S.P. Kadam, Advocate for Applicant. Mrs.Vrushali Raje, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mr.Y.S. Shinde, APP for State. Coram : SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. Date : 7th August, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned APP. 2. This Revision Application is preferred to challenge the order of dismissal in Criminal Appeal No.14 of 2007 passed by the Sessions Court on 29th January 2009. From the impugned order, it is seen that the applicant had sought an adjournment for settlement of dispute with respondents. When the adjournment was refused, the learned Advocate appearing had requested that the matter be kept back, so that the senior could attend to the matter. This request was also refused and the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution. It was obligatory on the part of the Sessions Court to consider the appeal and decide the same on merit. In the circumstances, the Court could not have dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. Hence, the Criminal 2 Revision Application is allowed. The order dated 29th May 2009 passed by learned Sessions Judge is set aside. The Criminal Appeal No. 229 of 2007 is restored to file. The Sessions Court is directed to consider the appeal and dispose off the same on merits as early as possible. (SMT.R.P. SONDURBALDOTA,J)