-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.932 of 2008 Shivdevi Jayashankar Pandey ..Petitioner vs. Laxmibaug Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit ..Respondent Shri A.B.Rai for petitioner. Shri R.S.Ghatke for respondent CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 11th February, 2008 11th February, 2008 11th February, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Mentioned. Not on board. 2. Taken up with consent of the Advocates and disposed of. 3. It appears that the lower Appellate Court has dismissed the application for condonation of delay on account of want of necessary particulars including with regard to the date of the impugned order and the date on which the application to challenge the same was filed so also the number of days that have gone by. Proper remedy for the petitioner is to withdraw the application and file appropriate application. That having not been done, the -2- Trial Court has proceeded to pass the impugned order. 4. In my view interest of justice would be subserved if the application on which the order under challenge is passed is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file appropriate application. Such application be preferred within a period of two weeks from today. If the same is not preferred the order under challenge is confirmed and the writ petition would stand dismissed without reference to Court. Application if filed be heard on its own merits without being influenced by earlier rejection. Petition disposed of. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)