BUDDHDEV ENTERPRISES Vs. RAMCHANDRA VAIJANATH JOSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although, as per the service report, Respondents remain unserved, but Mr. Ashish Gogate, Advocate has put in appearance on their behalf. At the outset, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant states that as per her instructions, the Appellant is ready and willing to comply with the directions issued in the impugned order, provided two months' time is granted to her for making full payment in terms of the said order. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, on the other hand, submits that having regard to the past conduct of the Appellant in some other mattes and the fact that she is avoiding appearance before the State Commission in Execution proceedings, he is apprehensive whether the offer made is sincere or just to gain further time to comply with the directions, impugned in these Appeals.

(2.) Without commenting on the apprehension expressed by learned Counsel for the Respondents, we have no reason to doubt the categorical statement made on behalf of the Appellant by her Counsel,

(3.) we dispose of the present Appeals with a direction that the State Commission shall keep the Execution proceedings in abeyance for a period of two months from today, to enable the Appellant to comply with the statement made before us on her behalf. However, we clarify that if the Appellant defaults in making full payment in terms of the directions issued in the impugned order within the said time, the State Commission shall proceed with the execution proceedings in accordance with law.