[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.115 OF 2008 IN REVIEW PETITION NO.123 OF 2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3125 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NOS.268 & 269 OF 2008 Shri.Prakash R.Shidore ..Appellant Vs. Divisional Joint Registrar Co.Operative Societies Pune and Ors. ..Respondents .... Mr.G.S.Godbole and Manjiri Parasnis Adv. for Appellant Mr.S.S.Patwardhan for Respondent No.4 .... CORAM: J.N.PATEL AND CORAM: J.N.PATEL AND CORAM: J.N.PATEL AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 26, 2009 DATE : FEBRUARY 26, 2009 DATE : FEBRUARY 26, 2009 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard. 2. The subject matter of the petition pertains to allotment of tenement in the society and affects rights to property of the parties which is also a subject matter of the dispute pending before the [-2-] Co-Operative Court and the petition impugns the order of the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Pune wherein the issue of membership of the society is involved. 3. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed impugning the order dated 24.1.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.123 of 2007 wherein the learned Single Judge held that on 14.9.2006. The petition came to be dismissed not only in the absence of the advocate but also after considering the merits of the matter. 4. It is the case of the learned counsel of the Appellant that dismissal of the petition has resulted in miscarriage of justice and this is for no fault of the Appellant but that of his Advocate who has also filed affidavit on record in support of Review Petition giving reasons for which he could not attend the proceedings before this Court. We have also gone through the order dated 14.9.2006 and we find that the learned Single Judge ought to have reconsidered the same as the petition came to be dismissed summarily without assistance of the Advocate. [-3-] 5. Therefore, in order to give a fair chance to the Appellant, we quash and set aside the order dated 24.1.2008 as well as order dated 14.9.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge subject to costs of Rs.15,000/- to be paid by the Appellant to Respondent No.4. The matter is remitted back to the learned Single Judge for taking up the Writ Petition afresh for admission. We make it clear that in case the Appellant-original Petitioner does not prosecute the matter diligently, no further indulgence in the matter is required to be shown to the parties. Costs to be paid by the Appellant to Respondent No.4 within a period of four weeks from today. Thereafter, list the matter before appropriate Bench for admission. Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of. 6. In view of the disposal of this Appeal, Civil Applications do not survive and are dismissed as infructuous. [J.N.PATEL, J.] [J.N.PATEL, J.] [J.N.PATEL, J.] [-4-] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]