IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO. 1029 OF 2009 AND MCA ST.NO. 17240 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5377 OF 2004 (AJAYKUMAR YADAORAO NIKHAR... VS... STATE OF MAH. & OTH.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Shri S.R.Narnaware, Advocate for Applicant. Mrs. T.D.Khade, A.G.P. for Respondents No.1 & 3. Shri S.S.Sharma, Advocate for Respondent No.6. CORAM : A.H.JOSHI & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED : NOVEMBER 16, 2009. 1. Learned Advocate for the petitioner prays for leave to tender fresh applications. 2. Leave granted. 3. In view of this, the learned Advocate for the petitioner prays for permission to withdraw the present application. 4. Both the applications are disposed of as withdrawn. JUDGE JUDGE RR. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO.1057 OF 2009 AND MCA ST.NO.18428 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5377 OF 2004 (AJAYKUMAR YADAORAO NIKHAR... VS... STATE OF MAH. & OTH.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Shri S.R.Narnaware, Advocate for Applicant. Mrs. T.D.Khade, A.G.P. for Respondents No.1 & 3. Shri S.S.Sharma, Advocate for Respondent No.6. CORAM : A.H.JOSHI & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED : NOVEMBER 16, 2009. 1. Heard. 2. Application tendered in the Court. 3. Accepting the reasons assigned in the application, explaining the absence of the learned Advocate for the petitioner when the case was called out for hearing on 08.09.2009, as well as reasons towards delay caused in filing application for restoration, both the applications are allowed. Writ Petition No.5377 of 2004 is restored to file. JUDGE JUDGE RR. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.5377 OF 2004 (AJAYKUMAR YADAORAO NIKHAR... VS... STATE OF MAH. & OTH.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Shri S.R.Narnaware, Advocate for Applicant. Mrs. T.D.Khade, A.G.P. for Respondents No.1 & 3. Shri S.S.Sharma, Advocate for Respondent No.6. CORAM : A.H.JOSHI & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED : NOVEMBER 16, 2009. 1. Learned Advocate Shri Sharma for respondent No.6 states that due to personal grounds, advanced by the learned Advocate for the petitioner, restoration was not seriously objected. 2. Learned Advocate Shri Sharma further states that the matter was fixed for final hearing. The interim stay is in operation and restoration would prejudice the respondents. 3. In view of this, this Court directs that interim order shall continue only for four weeks from today. JUDGE JUDGE RR.