- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 49 OF 2009 Godrej & Boyce Mfg Co.Ltd ... Applicants vs Suren Kumar B.Shetty & anr ... Respondents Mr.Amit Desai with Mr.Subhash Desai i.b Bachubhai Munim & Co for Applicants Ms S.V.Gajre APP for State Mr.A.K.Menon for Respondent no.1 CORAM: A.S.OKA, J DATED: 30th June, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard learned senior counsel appearing for the applicants and learned counsel for the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent is the complainant who filed a private complaint. The private complaint was dismissed by the learned Magistrate in exercise of powers under section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. A Revision Application was preferred by the 1st respondent- complainant before the Sessions Court for challenging the said order. By the impugned order, the Revision application has been allowed and the learned Magistrate has been directed to issue process against the applicants. 2. The grievance of the applicants is that the - 2 - applicants ought to have been heard in the Revision Application in view of the decision of this court in the case of Shriram Nagordhar Mahajan & ors vs State of Maharashtra (2006 Cri.L.J. 2216). Admittedly the applicants were not served with notice of the Revision Application. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-complainant submitted that the decision relied upon by the applicants is per-incuriam. However, without prejudice to the said contention, he states that instead of keeping this application pending, by setting aside the impugned order the Revision application be remanded to the Sessions court so that the applicants can be heard. 4. Hence, I pass the following order : (i) The impunged orders dated 1.9.2008 and 7.10.2008 are quashed and set aside. (ii) Criminal Revision Application No.474 of 2008 is restored to the file of the Sessions Court. (iii) The applicants and the 1st respondent are directed to appear before the learned Principal Judge ofthe City Civil Court, Mumbai on 27.7.2009 at 11 a.m. The learned Judge may himself take up the Revision Application for final disposal or may assign it to any other learned Judge as per the administrative convenience. It is made clear that no further notice of the Revision Application shall be served on the applicants and the applicants are under obligation to appear before the Sessions court on the date fixed by this - 3 - court. The applicants are permitted to appear through their advocate. (iv) All contentions of the parties on merits of the Revision Application are kept open. (v) Revision Application shall be decided as expeditiously as possible. (vi) The application is partly allowed in above terms. A.S.Oka, J - 4 - - 5 -