: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (LDG.) NO.245 OF 2009 Smt.Indu R. Kripalani & Anr. ....Petitioners V/s. Divisional Joint Registrar & Ors. ....Respondents Mr.J.S. Chandnani for the Petitioners. Ms.I.K. Calcattawalla, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5. Mr.Ashish Kamath i/b M/s.V.Deshpande & Co. for Respondent No.2. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 24TH FEBRUARY, 2009. P.C. : 1. Rule. By consent the rule is made returnable and heard finally. 2. The Petitioner filed a Revision Application on 5.11.2008. The Revisional authority by the impugned communication dated 3.1.2009 informed the Petitioner that if he intend to file the revision application, he may do so by paying 50% of the recoverable amount as per the recovery certificate. What is further stated is difficult to understand. Neither counsel have been able to throw any light on the same. 3. Mr.Kamath, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.2 fairly states that the impugned communication does not decide the amount to be deposited. He submitted that the same is yet to be : 2 : determined by the revisional authority. Hence he submitted that the Writ Petition is not maintainable. 4. Mr.Kamath’s submission is well founded. The impugned communication has not finally decided the amount that ought to be deposited. Indeed the revisional authority would have to first hear the parties to decide as to the amount which is required to be deposited under Section 154(2-A). Several contentions have been urged on behalf of the Petitioner in this regard including the effect of the Full Bench judgment of this Court and it having subsequently been over-ruled by the Apex Court as well as the effect of an amount of Rs.5,25,000/- having already been deposited with the bank pursuant to the orders of this Court. 5. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of by the following order :- i). The Revisional Authority shall hear both the parties and pass a reasoned order as to the amount to be deposited as a pre-condition for the maintainability of the revision application. Needless to add that all the contentions of the parties in this regard are kept open. It is clarified that the Respondents’ contentions regarding the : 3 : maintainability of the revision application even on other grounds are kept open.