IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.739 OF 2006 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.531 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.740 OF 2006 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.532 OF 2006 M/s.Ray Construction ...Applicant Versus Indian Institute of Technology ...Respondent ...... Mr.R.O.Pathak for Applicant. None for Respondent. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. AUGUST 4, 2006. AUGUST 4, 2006. AUGUST 4, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the Applicant. Perused the Application. 2. Explanation offered in the Application is : 2 : unacceptable. However, as the litigant should not suffer for the mistake of the Advocate, this Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), on condition that the Advocate on record shall personally pay cost quantified at Rs.750/- (Rupees seven Hundred Fifty) in each case to the High Court Legal Services Committee on or before 9th August 2006 and produce receipt of such payment in the Office, failing which, Office to treat this Application as dismissed for non-prosecution. 3. If the above direction is complied in time, the main matter be processed further and be listed as per its turn. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.