1 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2134/2010. (Abhinandan s/o Pandurang Jawkar Vs. Dr.Dayasagar Jawkar and Ors.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.MP Kale, Adv. for petitioner. *** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 28 th October, 2010. ... 1) Heard learned counsel for petitioner. 2) Before issuing notice to the respondents, the matter is heard and I find, for the reasons to be recorded, presence of respondents, who are 82 in numbers, is not imperative. 3) A long drawn litigation between inter se relations is surfaced. Special Civil Suit No.48/1983 was decreed on 18.4.1996. The writ petitioner was defendant. He challenged the said decree in first appeal No.588/1996 before this Court. It was subsequently transfered to the District Court owing to change in the pecuniary jurisdiction. The petitioner was required to take steps to serve the respondents in the appeal, however record illustrate, time to time, he was accommodated and in 2 spite of specific directions to inform the court about service to the respondents in the said appeal, no steps were taken by the petitioner. 4) Application Exhibit-32 was moved by the respondents in the Regular Civil Appeal No.124/2001 before the District Judge. In spite of availing several opportunities, the petitioner did not even care to reply. The learned District Judge, while dispelling the contentions of the petitioner, has elaborately demonstrated the conduct, not warranting interference in the activities and I endorse the same. 5) No merit in the writ petition, dismissed. No costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/