1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Civil Application (CAW) No. 363 of 2011 in Writ Petition No. 1909 of 2010 (d) Abdul Rahim Sheikh Mehboob VERSUS State of Mahashtra and others - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. M. I. Dhatrak, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner. Mrs. M. H. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 to 5 Mr. B. N. Mohta, Advocate for Respondent no.6 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : JUNE 20, 2011. Heard. By this application, the applicant seeks a recall of the order, dated 22/4/2010, passed by this Court in Writ Petition no. 1909/2010 as it is the case of the applicant that he had not filed the Writ Petition no. 1909/2010 before this Court. It is the case of the applicant that the applicant had entered into an Agreement of Sale on 21/1/2009 with one Mr. Syed Ahmed. It is stated in the application that a part of the said property was ‘B’ Tenure land and a part of it was ‘A’ Tenure land. It is the case of the applicant that the purchaser did not take any steps for seeking no objection from the concerned authority and gave a xerox copy of the order passed in Writ Petition no. 1909/2010 to the present 2 applicant. After receiving the copy of the order passed in Writ Petition no. 1909/2010, the applicant realized that somebody had filed the writ petition on behalf of the applicant, though the applicant had not filed the writ petition and the signature on the affidavit was also not the signature of the applicant. The applicant states that the applicant approached the Hand Writing Expert and gave a specimen of the signature of the applicant on the Agreement of Sale and the signature in the Solemn Affirmation in the writ petition. The Hand Writing Expert opined that the signature in the writ petition was not that of the applicant. A copy of the opinion of the Hand Writing Expert is annexed to the application. It is stated by the applicant that the proposed purchaser had clearly admitted in the civil suit that he, with his own expenses, had sought the order dated 22/4/2010, after filing Writ Petition no. 1909/2010. It is the case of the applicant that he had never been to the counsel Shri G. K. Mundhada and had also not filed Writ Petition no. 1909/2010. In the aforesaid set of circumstances, the applicant seeks a recall of the order dated 22/4/2010 as the applicant had not filed Writ Petition no. 1909/2010. On issuance of notice to the parties, the respondent no.4-Sub-Registrar, Yavatmal and respondent no.6-Mr. G. K. Mundhada, the counsel, who had appeared in the Writ Petition no. 1909/2010, have filed their reply. It is stated in the reply of the respondent no.4 that appropriate orders may be passed in the matter as the order dated 22/4/2010 in Writ Petition no. 1909/2010 has not been produced by the petitioner/applicant or anybody else in the office of the respondent no.4-Sub-Registrar. 3 It is stated in the reply of the respondent no.6 that a person had approached the counsel and had disclosed his name as Abdul Rahim Sheikh Mehboob, i.e. the name of the applicant. Since, the said person had submitted all the necessary documents to the counsel and had asked to file the writ petition, it is the case of the respondent no.6 that the writ petition was filed in this Court on a belief that the person who approached the respondent no.6was indeed Abdul Rahim Sheikh Mehboob. It is stated in the reply that in the facts of the case, there was a bona fide reason to believe that the person, who approached the respondent no.6, was indeed Abdul Rahim Sheikh Mehboob. On perusal of the application and the replies filed thereto, along with the report of the Hand Writing Expert, it appears that the applicant had not filed Writ Petition no. 1909/2010 and probably the same came to be filed by the proposed purchaser, namely Mr. Syed Ahmed. According to the Hand Writing Expert’s opinion, the signature in the writ petition and the signature on the Agreement of Sale, dated 21/1/2009, is not of the same person, i.e. the applicant. In such circumstances, it would be necessary to recall the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition no. 1909/2010 on 22/4/2010 and dispose of Writ Petition no. 1909/2010, by holding that the same was not filed by the applicant, i.e. Abdul Rahim Sheikh Mehboob. The Civil Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE Diwale