1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 5666 OF 2006 (Murlidhar Barku Bhoyar and another .v. Assistant Registrar and others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri M.P. Kalar, Advocate for the petitioners. CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 10TH FEBRUARY, 2009. The motion for adjournment was made in the morning at 10:30 a.m. on behalf of Shri Mohd. Ateeque, the learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.4 to 6 on the ground that he was not in a position to appear in this Court today. Since Shri M.P. Kalar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner was not informed about the adjournment, the learned Counsel holding for Shri Mohd. Ateeque was requested to inform Shri M.P. Kalar and make a motion for adjournment thereafter. When the matter is called out at 12:00 noon, again a request is made by Shri M.K. Pathan, the learned Counsel holding for Shri Mohd. Ateeque, the learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.4 to 6 for adjournment. Shri M.P. Kalar, the learned Counsel for the petitioners makes a grievance that he could have been informed about the adjournment in the morning itself. 2 When the adjournments are sought in the matter, we expect the learned Counsel to mention at 10:30 a.m. after informing to the opposite party and after seeking no objection so that no inconvenience is caused to the opposite party, more particularly their Counsel who have to wait in the Court for their matters to be called out. In view of the above, we grant adjournment at the request of the learned Counsel holding for Advocate Ateeque for the respondent Nos.4 to 6 subject to respondent Nos.4 to 6 paying the costs of Rs.750/- in favour of the High Court Legal Services Sub Committee, Nagpur within a period of two weeks from today. S.O. to 3rd March, 2009. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.