FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.5287 OF 2006 -----------------------------------:------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court’s or Judge’s orders. coram, appearances, Court’s orders : or directions and Registrar’s : orders. : -----------------------------------:------------------------------------- Mr.M.H.Solkar AGP for the petitioners. Mr.Sunil K.Kale for respondent no.1. Mr.Rajendra Desai for respondent nos.2 and 3. CORAM: D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM: D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM: D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED: 15TH FEBRUARY, 2008 DATED: 15TH FEBRUARY, 2008 DATED: 15TH FEBRUARY, 2008 P.C.: . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This petition is directed against the judgment and order 19.11.2005 passed by the Joint District Judge in Miscellaneous Application No.156 of 2005 filed by the petitioners, seeking condonation of delay in filing the regular appeal against the judgment and order dated 23.12.2004. By the impugned order the application filed by the petitioners has been rejected. 3. Respondent No.1 had filed regular civil suit No.190/1999 for declaration that licence No.F.L.II/15 was the property of partnership firm M/s.Hiraki Wines and after retirement of defendant no.4, that is, the father of respondent nos.2 and 3, the plaintiff alone is entitled for use of licence and to run the said business. He had also prayed for injunction against the defendants. The suit was decreed holding that the said licence is the property of M/s.Hiraki Wines and the plaintiff alone is entitled for the said licence and perpetual injunction was also granted against the defendants. This court is informed by learned counsel for respondent nos.1 to 3 that the parties have amicably settled the dispute after disposal of the suit and they have jointly applied for the transfer of licence to the concerned authority. In view thereof I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order in the writ jurisdiction of this court whereby the court below has refused to condone the delay. In the circumstances the writ petition is dismissed. The concerned authority shall deal with the application filed by respondent nos.1 to 3 for transfer of licence in accordance with law. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)