1 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION NO.5126 OF 1992. WRIT PETITION NO.5126 OF 1992. WRIT PETITION NO.5126 OF 1992. Shivaji Babaji Pawar : Petitioner. versus Subodh Khanderao Waghmode and ors. : Respondents. Mr.H.M.Kulkarni h/f Mr.A.A. Kumbhakoni for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE, J. CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE, J. CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE, J. DATED : September 15, 2006. DATED : September 15, 2006. DATED : September 15, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Advocate Mr.H.M.Kulkarni h/f Mr.Kumbhakoni for the petitioner is present. He states that till today they could serve the Respondent No.1 only and, therefore, one week time may be granted to serve other respondents i.e. Respondent Nos. 2 to 11. 2 2 2 2. This petition is pending since 1992. Rule is obtained by the petitioner in 1993 and ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c) was granted on 8.2.93. The advocate for the petitioner has courage to state before the Court that for the last fourteen years, in spite of obtaining exparte ad-interim order, he could not serve the other Respondent Nos. 2 to 11. Roznama shows that on 23.3.1994 liberty was given to the petitioner for removing the objections. This is nothing but a total callousness on the part of the petitioner after pocketing the order from the court exparte. Petition is, therefore, dismissed. Rule is discharged. Ad-interim order stands vacated. [D.G.DESHPANDE, J.] [D.G.DESHPANDE, J.] [D.G.DESHPANDE, J.]