1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR First Appeal No. 380/1993 (Janardhan Dattatraya Dorlikar Vs. Laxman Nago Yedne & ors.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. M.N. Ingle, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. N.S. Bhattad, Advocate, for the respondent nos. 1 and 2. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : JULY 28 , 2009 . Shri M.N. Ingle, the learned counsel for the appellant, states that the appellant and the respondent no. 1 had signed a compromise note on 2/6/2009 and had handed over the same to the counsel for the appellant. Thereafter, according to the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant has not responded to the various communications issued by the counsel for the appellant to the appellant, informing the appellant about the progress of the matter. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant by the learned counsel that the appellant is probably not interested in prosecuting the appeal in view of the compromise note which was signed by the parties on 2/6/2009. The learned counsel for the appellant states that he has no instructions in the matter. Shri Bhattad, the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2, submits that the respondent nos. 1 and 2 are also not responding to the 2 communications issued by the counsel to the respondent nos. 1 and 2. In such circumstances, according to the learned counsel for the respondents, it is believable that the parties are not responding to their counsel in view of the compromise note signed by the parties on 2/6/2009. In view of the statements made on behalf of the parties, the appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RMP