IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2804 OF 2009 M/s.Manilal & Son ...Petitioners V/s. Bombay Forgings Ltd. ...Respondents ...... Mr.S.P.Chinoy, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Birendra Saraf i/b M/s.Federal & Rashmikant for Petitioner. Dr.Virendra V.Tulzapurkar, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Ranjit Shetty & Mr.Shailesh P. i/b M/s.Hariani & Co. for the Respondents. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. MARCH 17, 2009. MARCH 17, 2009. MARCH 17, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. According to the Petitioners, the reason stated by the lower Court in Paragraph 19 for showing indulgence to the Respondents is inappropriate. The lower Court has observed that change of Advocate and non-availability of time to the Advocate on account of being busy in another : 2 : proceedings and thereafter not keeping well is sufficient ground. The view so taken by the lower Court in my opinion is a possible view. The order which is impugned in this Petition being a discretionary order, no interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction is warranted. 3. There is, however, one aspect which can be placed on record. The Petitioners apprehend that the Respondents are trying to protract the proceedings. The concerned lower Court which is enquiring into the issue of mesne profit may keep this aspect in mind while the matter is in progress. The Respondents through Counsel assure that Respondents shall extend necessary cooperation to the lower Court for early disposal of the enquiry. That assurance is placed on record. No other aspect needs to be addressed at this stage. 4. Petition disposed of on the above terms. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.