1 14.wp5575.11 ast IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5575 OF 2011 Mr. Sevantilal Mohanlal Vora. ....Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ....Respondents Mr. Vijay Sevantilal Vora, Petitioner’s son present. Ms. Ushal Tiwari, Advocate for Respondent No. 2. Mrs. Neha Bhide, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3. CORAM:- GIRISH GODBOLE, J DATED:- DECEMBER 12, 2011 P.C. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties. Mrs. Bhide, AGP waives service on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Ms. Ushal Tiwari waives service on behalf of the Respondent No. 2. 2. Mr. Vijay Vora, son of the Petitioner appears on behalf of the Petitioner and states that the Petitioner is unable to attend the court and the Advocate is also out of station. The learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 Smt. Ushal Tiwari states that 50% of amount of 2 14.wp5575.11 recoverable dues would come to Rs. 93,017/-. Son of the Petitioner has handed over cross-account payee banker’s cheque No. 383920 for Rs. 90,000/- drawn on Bank of Baroda, Gamdevi Branch, Mumbai. The same is accepted by the Respondent No. 2. He has also paid cash of Rs. 3017/- to the Advocate for Respondent No. 2 in court in my presence. Even this amount is accepted. 3. Thus, the Petitioner has complied with the statutory requirement of 50% deposit of the recoverable amount under Section 154(2A) of the M.C.S. Act, 1960. In view of this, the Revision Application filed by the Petitioner deserves to be heard on merits. Hence the impugned Judgment and Order dated 12/7/2011 passed by the learned DJRCS, Mumbai Division, Mumbai in Revision Application No. 304 of 2011 being Exh. A to the Petition is quashed and set aside. The said Revision Application is restored to file and shall be disposed of expeditiously and in any case on or before 31st March, 2012. 4. Interim order operating in favour of the Petitioner will continue to operate till disposal of the Revision Application. 3 14.wp5575.11 5. All the contention of the respective parties on merits of the controversy are kept open. 6. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. (GIRISH GODBOLE, J)