1 ndm 58 cra.403.09 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 403 OF 2009 Sukhdeo Bhivaji Jagtap Vs. Smt. Laxmibai Laxman Mithapalli and ors Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr. Purushottam G.Chavan for the Applicant. Mr. I.M.Khairdi for Respondent No.3A to 3F & 4 to 10. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 21 st December, 2010. P.C. 1 The learned counsel appearing for the Applicant on instructions of the Applicant, who is present in Court, states that the Applicant is not pressing the application on merits. He states that the present age of the Applicant is 82 years and he is carrying on business in the suit premises from the year 1951. He, therefore, prays that the time to vacate the suit premises of more than four years be granted to the Applicant. The learned counsel appearing for the original plaintiff opposes the prayer and submits that a reasonable time may be granted. 2 The Applicant has made a statement that he is not pressing the revision application on merits. Therefore, the decree for possession will attained finality. The present age of the applicant is 82 years and he has been carrying on business in the suit premises from the year 1951. Considering these 2 aspects, a longer time to vacate deserves to be granted till the end of December, 2013. 3 Hence, revision application is disposed of by passing following order: i. Revision application is dismissed as not pressed ; ii. Notwithstanding the dismissal of the revision application, the decree for possession shall not be executed till 31 st December 2013 subject to applicant filing usual undertaking in this Court within a period of four weeks from today ; iii. If undertaking is not filed within the stipulated period, the decree for possession will become forthwith executable ; [ A.S.OKA, J ]