IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.837 OF 2008 FIRST APPEAL NO.837 OF 2008 FIRST APPEAL NO.837 OF 2008 Ramsevak Ramharak Kurmi ... Appellant (Org. Plaintiff) Versus The Manager, B.D.D. Chawl Authority & Anr. Respondents (Org. defendants) Mr. S.S.Redekar, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.S.N.Gawade, AGP, for Respondents. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE: 22nd July, 2008. DATE: 22nd July, 2008. DATE: 22nd July, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The plaintiff-appellant claims to be a distant relative of one one Purai Bhagwat who was occupying room No.7, Chawl No.9, Delisle Road, N.M.Joshi Marg, Mumbai, as a tenant/licensee of respondent No.1. The said Purai died and his wife is not living there. The plaintiff claims that he was living in the said room along with Purai and his wife has also given consent for transfer of tenancy in his favour. He made an application to the respondent NO.1 for transfer of tenancy. As there was no reply, the notice under Section 80 of the of C.P.C. was issued. Still no action was taken and then he filed S.C. Suit No.2057 of 2007. No written statement was filed on behalf of the respondents. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiff is not covered by list of relatives mentioned in circular dated 12.1.1973. In the result, the suit came to be dismissed. Hence, the plaintiff preferred this Appeal. 3. After some discussion at the Bar, the learned Counsel for the appellant seeks to withdraw the Appeal with a request that the respondent No.1 should take a decision on his tenancy application for transfer of the tenancy. 4. The learned AGP appearing for the respondents has no objection for the same. 5. The Appeal stands disposed of as withdrawn. The respondent No.1 shall take a decision on the application of the plaintiff-appellant for transfer of his tenancy within eight weeks from this date. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.)