((-1-)) MST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.3881 OF 1989 Central Bank of India Plaintiffs versus M/s.Shikharji Development Corpn. and others Defendants Mr.F.Sayyed i/by M.K.Ambalal & Co. for plaintiffs Mr.Dhananjay Shukla i/by M.U.Panday for defendants 1 and 2. Mr.Amol Deokar for defendant no.5. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. DATE : 03rd September 2007 PC : 1. Counsel for plaintiff submits that in spite of repeated reminders no instructions are forthcoming. He submits that he is advised to take discharge from the matter. He states that in fact his office has already returned all the papers to the plaintiffs long back. If so, the plaintiff was expected to make alternate arrangement. 2. Counsel for the defendants, on the other ((-2-)) MST hand, submits that the suit claim has already been satisfied. The amount has already been paid to the plaintiffs. Perhaps that is the reason why no instructions are forthcoming from the plaintiffs. 3. Be that as it may, the suit is dismissed for non prosecution. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)