MOHD AZIZ UL HAQ Vs. DILIP MURLIDHAR LOHIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is to be noted that these proceedings were initially filed as Civil Revision Application under section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887, read with section 115 of Civil Procedure Code. When the matter was called out on 29.8.2008, this Court has in view of the judgment in the case of Dilip Bidesh Vs. Shiv Gopal, 2005(4) Mh.L.J. 967, found that said revision was not maintainable. The revision applicant then sought permission to convert revision into a writ petition and that permission was accordingly granted by reasoned order, after noticing the fact that revision was filed way back in 1995 and the matter was going on before various courts since 1986.

(2.) After conversion of revision into present writ petition, the matter has been again listed for final hearing. Shri Panpalia, Advocate, who had filed Vakalatnama for the respondent, has stated that on 24. 1.2002 itself, he filed pursis vide Stamp No. 679 of 2002, seeking leave to withdraw Vakalatnama in view of the letter of client dated 15.1.2002 annexed with that pursis. The perusal of xerox copy of that letter on record shows that the respondent instructed Shri Panpalia, Advocate to hand over the papers and file with him to Shri G.B. Lohiya, Advocate and also to give no objection to said Advocate. Shri Panpalia, Advocate states that accordingly, he had handed over the papers and no objection. Nobody has thereafter appeared for the respondent. In view of the statement made by Shri Panpalia, Advocate, he is discharged from the matter.

(3.) Shri Chandurkar, learned Counsel states that the controversy in this writ petition is very narrow. He also states that in view of the judgment of this Court dated (29.8.2008 in Civil Revision Application No. 654 of 1995), the controversy stands concluded in his favour. As such, the only question which arose was whether it is necessary to issue notice of the matter again to the respondent after its conversion into a writ petition.