1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2164 OF 2010 (Chandrakant P. Bhat & Ors. vs. Purushottam M. Motwani & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. MAY 04, 2010. Heard Shri Ghare, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Mrs. Taiwade, learned AGP for respondent No.2. The facts show that after 01.04.2010, FL-III license standing in the name of present respondent No. 1 has not been renewed. Shri Ghare, learned counsel has invited attention to General Power of Attorney dated 01.10.2007 and Section 202 of Indian Contract Act. Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 states that his client has moved Respondent No.2 in writing for not renewing the license. The learned AGP points out that the Additional Government Pleader has pointed out to appellate Court that present Respondent No. 1 has himself moved an application for discontinuing the renewal of license. In view of this position, it is apparent that the 2 license has not been renewed after 01.04.2010. The prayers made by the petitioners in Exh. 5, therefore, cannot be considered in these changed circumstances. The arguments advanced by Shri Ghare, learned counsel on merits, therefore, need not be considered at this stage. However, Shri Ghare, learned counsel has contended that the petitioners have deposited the amount of Rs.3,10,000/- for renewal from 2010 to 2011 and that amount is accepted by Respondent No.2. He contends that taking advantage of that amount and in view of the adverse orders passed against the petitioners, Respondent No. 1 may get his license renewed by utilizing very same amount. Shri Deshpande, learned counsel states that Respondent No. 1 will not do so and he has no such intentions. In view of the statement made by Shri Deshpande, learned counsel, later submissions of the petitioners are also taken care of. However, by way of abundant precautions, it is clarified that if Respondent No.1 moves for renewal, he will inform the trial Court and thereafter shall proceed further in the matter. With this clarification/ observation, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.