*1* 74.cas.180.11 skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 180 OF 2011 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 126 OF 2005 Shri Balkrishna Shripati Barge ..Applicant -Versus- Sou.Manukabai Nana Kate & Ors. ..Respondents .......... Mr.G.H.Keluskar for the Applicant. None for the Respondents. .......... CORAM : K.K. TATED, J. DATE : 7TH FEBRUARY 2011. P.C. 1 Heard learned counsel Mr.G.H.Keluskar for the applicant. 2 This civil application is preferred by the original defendant no.2 for issuing fresh notice to respondent nos. 1 and 3 on the present correct address as stated in paragraph 2 of the civil application, which reads as under : “(i) Respondent No.1 -Sou.Manukabai Nana Kate, residing at Katewadi Kanerkhed, Taluka Koregaon, District Satara; *2* 74.cas.180.11 (ii) Respondent No.3 – Shri Bhanudas Shripati Barge, residing at Chinchaner Vandant, Taluka and District Satara” 3 The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that when the appeal was on board before the learned Registrar (Judicial-I) for orders on 5th January 2011, at that time, they learnt that the notices issued to respondent no.1 and 3 were returned unserved with the bailiff’s remarks : “nor staying at given address”. Thereafter, the applicant made necessary enquiry about the correct addresses of the respondents and they learnt about the present addresses of respondent nos.1 and 3 as given in paragraph 2 of the civil application. 4 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the applicants and the averments made in the civil application, the civil application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads thus : “(a) to issue fresh notices to respondent nos. 1 and 3 at given address in paragraph no.2 of this civil application.” 5 Notice to respondent nos. 1 and 3 returnable on 2nd May 2011. 6 The civil application disposed of accordingly. ( K.K. TATED, J.)