1 48.n.1171.2014.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE NO. 1171 OF 2014 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION (LODG.) NO. 448 OF 2015 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 659 OF 2014 Sheth Shelters Pvt. Ltd. .. Decree Holder/Petitioner Vs. Smt. Gangabai Jagannath Bhandari .. Judgement Debtor/Respondent SUIT NO. 3696 OF 2001 Bindu Govind thombre & Anr. .. Plaintiffs Vs. Neelubai Govind Thombre & Anr. .. Defendants Mr.Himanshu Takke i/b Kinjal Sakhida for applicant. Mr.Sachin B. Mhaske for defendant nos.8, 19, 20, 21, 21(a), 25 & 26. Ms.Kusumbai M. Thombre- respondent no.8 present. Mr.Devidas D. Bhandari, respondent no.19 present. Mr.Bharat D. Bhandari, respondent No.20 present. Ms.Nilam B. Bhandari, respondent No.21(a) present. Ms.Ranjana K. Mokashi, respondent No.25 present. Ms.Meena M. Keni, respondent No.26 present. CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J. DATE : 27TH APRIL, 2016 P.C. Shraddha Talekar PS 1/3 2 48.n.1171.2014.doc 1 Shri Mhaske, counsel states that he has been instructed by respondent Nos.8, 19, 20, 21, 21(a), 25 & 26. The counsel also states that they are present in Court and identifies them. He further states that he has no objection if the notice is made absolute against them. 3 The notice as against respondent Nos.8, 19, 20, 21(a), 25 & 26 is made absolute and disposed of accordingly. 4 As regards defendant nos.22 and 23 are concerned, they have also filed the consent terms for making the notices absolute against them. The rest of the defendants have been served as recorded in the order dated 6th February 2016. On 22nd July 2015 and thereafter on 12th August 2015, all the defendants were directed to file affidavit of evidence as also documents. The counsel for the plaintiff states that none of the other defendants have filed affidavit of evidence or documents or any reply. 5 In the circumstances, the notice of motion is made absolute as against all defendants. Shraddha Talekar PS 2/3 3 48.n.1171.2014.doc NOTICE OF MOTION (LODG.) NO. 448 OF 2015 None present for the applicant. The notice of motion, therefore, dismissed for want of prosecution. (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Shraddha Talekar PS 3/3