1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3913 OF 2009 Smt.Nalini Sujresh Jadhav Petitioner versus Anandrao Mugutrao Jadhav and others Respondents P.J.Shinde for petitioner. R.B.Rane for respondentn no.5. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 21st April 2010 PC : 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent no.5. The petitioner is the original plaintiff. An application was made by the petitioner before the Trial Court under Sub Rule 3 of Rule 1 of Order XXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The prayer in the said application at Exhibit-79 was that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the suit with liberty to institute a fresh suit in respect of subject matter of the present suit. By the impugned order, the prayer made has been rejected by the learned Trial Judge. When the petition was heard for admission on 8th March 2010, a statement was made by the learned counsel for the fifth respondent that within a week from the said date, an application will be made by the said respondent for transposing him as a plaintiff. The statement was accepted and in view of the said statement, the writ petition was adjourned till today. The Trial Court was directed to decide the application expeditiously. The learned counsel 2 appearing for the fifth respondent states that the application has not been filed in terms of the statement of fifth respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that instead of filing an application before the Trial Court, the fifth respondent has taken out a civil application in the present application for transfer of the suit and praying for transposing the respondent no.5 as the plaintiff. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on instructions states that the petitioner wants to unconditionally withdraw the suit. If the petitioner wants to unconditionally withdraw the suit, he cannot be prevented from doing so as remedies of the defendants always remain open. In the circumstances, the petition need not be kept pending and the same can be finally disposed of by passing following order. 3. ORDER :- A) The impugned order is quashed and set aside; B) Regular Civil suit No.188 of 1997 is dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs; C) Writ petition is disposed of in above terms; D) In view of withdrawal of the suit, Civil Application No.6776 of 2010 does not survive and the same is disposed of. (A.S.OKA, J.)