IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR M.C.A. No.1022/2009 in C.A. No.314/2009 in M.C.A. St. No.4984/2009 in Second Appeal No.288/1992 ( Dattarao S/o Gangaram Bhoyar & others ..V/s.. Subhash S/o Bhimrao Bhoyar & others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or judges Orders. CORAM: SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE: 4 th AUGUST 2010. Heard Shri Atique the learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Patil learned counsel for legal heirs of respondent no.3. Shri Patil, learned counsel for the legal heirs of respondent no.3, strongly opposes the prayer made in the civil application and states that sufficient cause is not shown for restoration of the Civil Application No.314/2009 in M.C.A. St. No.4984/2009. Though none appears on behalf of respondent no.1, respondent no.1 has filed the reply to the civil application and has stated that the contents of the civil application are devoid of any substance. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the civil application and the reply, it appears that sufficient cause has been made out for grant of prayer made in the civil application. The prayer made in the civil application is granted subject to payment of costs of Rs.1,500/- (Rs. One Thousand Five Hundred Only) in the High Court Legal Aid Services Sub-Committee, Nagpur within a period of two weeks. Civil application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and disposed of. Ad-interim relief to continue. Shri Patil, learned counsel for the legal heirs of respondent no.3, states that the applicant is trying to delay the matter as the decree of possession is passed against the applicants. It is stated that though appellant no.2 Govind Bhoyar has expired about 3 to 4 months back, the applicants are not filing any application for bringing his legal heirs on record. Shri Atique, learned counsel for the applicants, states that the application for bringing the legal heirs of appellant no.2 on record would be positively filed within a period of two weeks. The matter may be listed thereafter for further orders. JUDGE Tambaskar.