1 1007.11 SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1007 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1008 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3211 OF 1989 Shri Antu Genu Shinde, Since deceased through his heirs & legal representatives: 1A.Shri Mahipati Antu Shinde & Ors. ...Applicants Versus Shri Tukaram Daji Nale, Since deceased through his heirs & legal representatives: 1A.Smt.Parvatibai Tukaram Nale, Since deceased through heirs 1A(i) & 1A(ii) & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Dilip Bodake for Applicants. Mr.Prasad Kulkarni for Respondent No.1A(i). Mr.Vishwanath Talkute for Respondent No.4. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. DATED:- OCTOBER 20, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. The background in which the order dated 28th August, 2003 came to be passed needs to be mentioned. The Petition was placed for hearing on 2 1007.11 that date. During the hearing, it was noticed that Petition is already dismissed for non-prosecution as against respondent Nos.2 and 3 vide order dated 23rd November, 1999. The petitioners had not taken any steps till August, 2003 when the Writ Petition was taken up for final hearing. The matter proceeded on that basis. After considering the rival submissions, the issue that was required to be considered in the Writ Petition has been dealt with in the said order and resultantly, the Petition came to be dismissed. 3. As regards prayer clause (a) to review the said order, in my opinion, no case for review is made out. 4. As regards the prayer for recalling the said order and to permit the petitioners to bring on record heirs and legal representatives of deceased respondent Nos.2 and 3, that stage is already over and cannot be reopened after the dismissal of the Writ Petition on merits. In my opinion, no interference is warranted. Rejected. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.