KJ 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICUATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.35 OF 2010 Seema S. Patki ..Petitioner Vs. Shripad A. Navalkar ..Respondent ---- Mr.P. G. Karande for the petitioner. Mr.Sameer Bhalekar for respondent nos.1(a) (b) & (c). ---- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J DATE : 25/8/2010 P. C.: 1 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned Advocate for the respondent nos.1 (a), (b) & (c). When this Court was inclined to issue rule, learned Advocate for the respondents stated that instead of keeping the CRA pending in this Court, an order of remand be passed and the Appeal Bench be directed to consider the appeal afresh. 2 Learned Advocate for the petitioner pointed out that a Civil Application seeking permission to file additional documentary KJ 2 evidence is pending. As the respondents have consented for passing an order of remand, petitioner will have to be granted liberty to file appropriate application before the appellate Court. Hence, CRA disposed of by passing following order :- O R D E R (i) The impugned judgment and order dated 17.11.2009 is quashed and set aside and Appeal No.595 of 2006 is restored to the file of the Appellate Court ; (ii)Parties are directed to appear before the Appellate Court on 27.9.2010 at 11.00 A.M.; (iii)After hearing the parties, appeal shall be decided afresh ; (iv)All contentions of the parties on merits are kept open. (v)It will be open for the petitioner to file application in the Appeal in terms of the prayers made in Civil Application No. 108 of 2010. Interim relief which was operating during the pendency of the appeal is also restored ; (vi)The appellate court shall decide the appeal as expeditiously KJ 3 as possible and preferably on or before 31.3.2011. (vii) Civil Revision Application is partly allowed in above terms. There will be no orders as to costs. (JUDGE)