1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3362 OF 2009 A/w C.A.Nos 1815/2009, 1816/09 AND WRIT PETITION NO. 7805 OF 2009 A/w C.A.No. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. Mr Mahendra Ghelani i/b M/s Law Charter, for the petitioner in W.P No. 3362/09. Mr R.M.Patne, AGP, for respondent no.1. Mr S.B.Shetye i/b S.V.Gavand for respondent in both petitions. Mr A.M.Kulkarni, for respondent no.3. In both petitions. Mr Sharan Jagtiani i/b RMG Law Asso. In CAW No.1816/09 and respondent nos 1 to 8 in suit No.3088 of 2008. Mr D.Madan, Senior Counsel with Chirag Mody with Anushka S. i/b DSK Legal in suit no.3088 of 2009. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATE : 24/09/2009 PC: Heard learned counsel for the parties. These two writ petitions are directed against the order dated T 2 26.11.2008 passed by respondent no.1 in RTS proceedings bearing No. RTS-2808/P.K.510/L-6. Writ Petition No. 3362 of 2009 is filed by Bhupesh Patel as Constituted Attorney of Sarfuddin I.Kazi, while Writ Petition No.7805 of 2009 is filed by Sarfuddin I. Kazi himself. There is a suite pending in this Court, being Special Civil Suit No.3008 of 2008 filed by Midtown Holding Leasing and Properties Pvt Ltd, of which Bhupesh Patel is a Director, against Sharfuddin Kazi and Ors. In this suit, the plaintiffs have prayed for declaration in respect of the Power of Attorney, on the basis of which Bhupesh Patel has filed the writ petition, and the agreement dated 19.9.2005. In view thereof, I am not entering into the objection as to the locus of Bhupesh Patel in challenging the impugned order. I have heard learned counsel for the parties for quite sometime and they 3 have fairly stated that I need not record reasons for setting aside the impugned order and they have agreed for the following order. (i) By consent the order dated 26.11.208 passed by respondent no.1 is set aside. (ii) It is open to respondent no.2 or any other aggrieved party to challenge the order dated 29.7.2008 passed by Additional Commissioner, Konkan Division in Appeal No.221 of 2008, in appropriate proceedings. (iii) Insofar as the contentions of the parties regarding the Power of Attorney are concerned, they are kept open to be raised in Suit No.3088 of 2008 and Notice of Mo0tion No.3196 of 2009 filed therein. (iv) With these observations, both the writ petitions are disposed of. Consequently,all civil applications also stand disposed of. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) 4 5