1 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5374 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. Sham Walve i/b Mr. D.K. Ghaisas for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Kumar Patil for respondent no.1. Mr. Mandar Limaye for respondent nos.3A to 3J. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 24TH JUNE 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent no.1. 2. The impugned order was passed on 8 December 2000. The present writ petition has been filed on 2 July 2007, i.e. after a lapse of more than 6 years. In my view, the petitioner is guilty of gross delay and laches. 2 3. The explanation for delay offered in para 5 of the petition is not at all satisfactory. It is alleged that after receipt of the certified copy on 20 February 2003, the petitioner initiated negotiations for settlement and on account of that he did not file the writ petition. This fact is strongly denied by the counsel for the respondent no.1. Assuming however that there were some negotiations, that would not explain the delay of more than 4 years even after receipt of the certified copy. It may also be noted that certified copy itself was applied after 14 months of the decision of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. There is no whisper of any explanation for this delay of 14 months of applying for a certified copy. The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)