IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.980 OF 1990 ALONG WITH WRIT PETITION NO.981 OF 1990 Shri Mahesh Sharadchandra Ajinkya ...Petitioner Versus Shri Markus Philips Mendosa ...Respondent ...... Mr.R.S.Apte with Mr.M.V.Limaye i/b Mr.B.P.Apte for Petitioner. Mr.C.G.Parulekar for Respondent. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. JULY 19, 2004. JULY 19, 2004. JULY 19, 2004. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Counsel for the parties fairly accept that the issues raised in both these Petitions are identical to one raised in Writ Petition No.5511 of 1989 decided by this Court on 27th August 2003 in the case of Dr.Sharadchandra Malharrao Ajinkya Dr.Sharadchandra Malharrao Ajinkya Dr.Sharadchandra Malharrao Ajinkya (deceased) through L.Rs. vs. Maricus Philips (deceased) through L.Rs. vs. Maricus Philips (deceased) through L.Rs. vs. Maricus Philips : 2 : Mendosa reported ion 2004(2) All M.R.134 Mendosa reported ion 2004(2) All M.R.134 Mendosa reported ion 2004(2) All M.R.134. In fact, these two Petitions were companion Petitions to above referred disposed of Writ Petition (5511/89), but were de-linked, as parties were negotiating for settlement. 2. As settlement is not possible, this Court has no option but to allow the Writ Petitions on the same terms, by setting aside the impugned order and remanding the case to the Appellate Authority to decide the same afresh on its own merits in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of writ of this Court. 3. The Appellate Authority may also consider of hearing the present remanded Petitions along with the leading case, which is already remanded by the aforesaid decision in the case of Dr.Sharadchandra Malharrao Ajinkya (Supra) Dr.Sharadchandra Malharrao Ajinkya (Supra) Dr.Sharadchandra Malharrao Ajinkya (Supra). 4. Petitions disposed of on the above terms. No order as to costs. : 3 : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.