1 cra599.sxw ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.599 OF 2010 1 Kantilal Mulshanker 2 Jayantilal Mulshanker 3 Smt.Kasturben Mulshanker Oza 4 Ashokumar Mulshanker Oza 5 Smt.Madhu A. Sharma ...Applicants vs. 1 Sudarshan Sardarmal Dotiya 2 Smt.Manjula Sudarshan Dotiya 3 Surendra Kumar Girdharilal ...Respondents Mr.G.S.Godbole i/b Ms Pallavi Dabholkar for the applicants Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar, Sr.Advocate i/b M/s Sarwankar & Co. for the respondent no.3 CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : OCTOBER 26, 2010 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the applicants on instructions of the second applicant who is stated to be personally present in the Court states that the applicants are not pressing this revision application on merits. He states that the applicants have also accepted the decree of eviction passed in another suit and therefore, the applicants will unconditionally withdraw the appeal no. 548 of 2007. He prays that time of three years and more be granted to vacate the suit premises subject to filing usual undertakings. 2 The learned counsel for the respondents opposes the 2 cra599.sxw prayer for grant of longer time to vacate the suit premises by pointing out that in the other suit, the decree of eviction has been passed against the applicants on the ground of non user. He submitted that in view of the decree on the ground of non user, longer time to vacate cannot be granted. 3 The applicants have made a statement that they are not pressing the present revision application on merits and they are also not pressing the appeal no.548 of 2007. Hence, both the decrees will attain finality. Moreover, the applicants have shown their willingness to give undertaking. As stated earlier, the aforesaid appeal against the decree passed in the another suit is pending before the Appellate Court in which there is an order of stay. Even if this revision application is to remain pending, it may not have reached for the final hearing in near future. There is no decree on the ground of bona fide requirement. In such peculiar circumstances, time of three years deserves to be granted subject to applicants filing usual undertaking of themselves and all adult members of their family. Apart from usual clauses, undertakings will record that the appeal no.548 of 2007 shall be unconditionally withdrawn within a period of four weeks from today. 4 Hence, I pass the following order : i) Revision application is dismissed as not pressed. ii)Notwithstanding the dismissal of the revision application, the decree for possession impugned in this revision application and the decree for possession impugned in appeal no.548 of 2007 shall not be executed till 26 th October 2013 subject to applicants filing their own usual undertakings as 3 cra599.sxw well as undertakings of the adult members of their family. iii)If undertakings are not filed in this Court within a period of four weeks from today, both the decrees will become forthwith executable. iv)This order will not prevent the original plaintiffs from initiating proceeding for fixing mesne profits. v) There will be no order as to costs. JUDGE