1 (Cr.Appln 167 of 2010 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 167 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 590 OF 2009 Chandrasekar Rao ...Applicant vs. Automobile Products of India Ltd. and Ors. ...Respondents ----- Mr.Ravindra Kadoor Shetty for the Applicant Mr. P.D. Desai for Respondent No.2 Mrs. V.R. Bhosale – APP for the State ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 12TH OCTOBER, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant and the learned counsel for the Respondent No.2. 2. This is an application filed by the Applicant seeking extension for a period of six months from 31st May, 2010 to vacate the flat situated at Bhandup, Mumbai and also for extending the undertaking given by the Applicant. 2 (Cr.Appln 167 of 2010 ) 3. It is not possible to accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the Applicant. By order dated 4th March, 2010, this Court had granted time to the Applicant to vacate the premises on or before 31st May, 2010. He was also asked to given an undertaking. In paragraph 6, the Learned Single Judge in his order dated 4th March, 2010 has observed as under: “Para 6: Rule is therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b). However, it is made clear that in case the Petitioner does not vacate the premises on or prior to 31st May, 2010 and hand over peaceful and vacant possession thereof to the Respondent Company the present Petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court. In addition to that the applicant would be liable to be prosecuted for committing contempt of this Court.” 4. In spite of the aforesaid order passed by the Learned Single Judge, the Applicant has now been filed application for seeking extension for a period of six months. In view of the observation made by the Learned Single Judge in paragraph 6 in the order, 3 (Cr.Appln 167 of 2010 ) further extension cannot be granted on account of non- compliance of the undertaking given by the Applicant. Even the revision application filed by the Applicant stands dismissed on account of non compliance of the order in view of the conditional order passed by the Learned Single Judge. 5. Hence, application for extension of time is dismissed and criminal revision application is also dismissed. (V.M. KANADE J.)