1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 220 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 7175 OF 2000 Smt. Sitabai Ramchandra Bharekar ....Applicant (Ori.Respdt.) vs Tata Engineering Locomotive Co. Ltd. ....Respondent (Ori.Petnr.) Ms. S.G. Jangam for the Applicant. Mr. Kiran Bapat for the Respondent. Mr. S.R. Nargolkar for the original Respondent. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 28TH JANUARY, 2010. P.C. :- 1. Mr. S.R. Nargolkar appeared at the request of the court. He had been engaged by the original Respondent and not his heirs. The original Respondent having expired, his authority automatically came to an end. The heirs had never authorised Mr. Nargolkar to appear on their behalf. There is no question, therefore, of issuing a no objection to their 2 present advocate. The statements regarding the learned advocate for the original Respondent in the Civil Application are, therefore, totally misconceived and unnecessary. In any event, Mr. Nargolkar states that he has no objection to any advocate appearing for the heirs. 2. In the circumstances, the Civil Application is allowed as prayed. A copy of the Civil Application shall be furnished by the present applicants and their advocate to Mr. Nargolkar forthwith. 3. Civil Application, accordingly, stands disposed of.