1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CA NO.6846/2009 IN FA NO.938/2006. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.SK Adkine, Adv. for applicant; Mr.DV Tele, AGP for Resp. No.1-State; Mr.AS Bajaj, Adv. for Resp. Nos. 2 to 4. ___ CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 13th January, 2010. ... 1) Heard. 2) A request is made for fixing the First Appeal for early hearing, same is strenuously opposed by the counsel for Respondent nos.2 to 4. 3) Similar such attempt was made by CA No. 1805/2009, and by order dated 26.3.2009, this Court rejected the request for fixing the matter for early hearing. I do not see that there is any change in the situation of pedency, giving preference to the First Appeal of 2006 and particularly when the matter revolves to apportionment of the amount of acquiring property and dispute revolves to the proportion therein. The parties are facing with chequered history of litigation. Earlier CA No. 2 3973/2009 in CA No.8364/2006 was also moved and by order dated 13.4.2009, it was rejected, which was concerning withdrawal of the amount, apparently made by suppressing the fact on behalf of one of the sisters – Shantabai. 4) Taking these aspects into consideration, though the request for fixing the first appeal for early hearing primarily appears to be innocuous, trivial in its nature, however, in its root there is something more, which, both the sides harp repeatedly, need not be addressed at this stage. Consequently, the request for fixing the First Appeal for early hearing is rejected. Application rejected. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/ca6846.09