4-WP-679-2000.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 679 OF 2000 Shri Sahadu Vithu Surve (decd) By Heirs And Ors. ...Petitioners Versus Smt. Vimalabai Vithalrao Daftardar (decd) By Heirs and Ors. ...Respondents **** None for the Petitioners. Mr. Hrutik R. Chavan h/f Mr. Ashutosh Kulkarni, for Respondents- 1(a) to 1(d). **** CORAM : M.M. SATHAYE, J. DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. : 1. On 09.06.2026, the following order was passed: “1. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that despite his best efforts including a written communication to the Petitioners, they are not responding with appropriate instructions to proceed with the petition. He further submits that Petitioner No. 1(b), 1(c) and 1(d), Petitioner No.2(a) have expired and their legal heirs are not coming forward. 2. In view of the said submissions, petition stands abated for Petitioner Nos. 1(b), 1(c), and 1(d) and Petitioner No.2(a). 3. Office is directed to issue notice to remaining Petitioners, returnable on 06.07.2026. Notice to indicate that if the Petitioners do not appear despite notice, appropriate ex-parte order will be passed.” Navnath Waghmare 1 NAVNATH SITARAM WAGHMARE Digitally signed by NAVNATH SITARAM WAGHMARE Date: 2026.09.16 17:49:40 +0530 4-WP-679-2000.doc 2. On 27.07.2026, the following order was passed: “1. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that pursuant to the earlier order dated 09.06.2026, private communication was issued to the remaining Petitioners. He submits that packets sent to 1(a), 1(e) 1(f) and 2(c) have returned with postal endorsements that parties are ‘not found on the given address’ or ‘left’. He states that the Petitioner No.2(d) Mr. Suresh Pandurang Surve is present in the Court and he is duly identified by him. He submits that Mr. Suresh Surve informed that the Petitioners are willing to engage another Advocate. 2. Advocate for the Petitioner is at liberty to file affidavit placing on record the returned packets indicating that his clients have left the address without informing the Court or Advocate. 3. In view of above, Petitioner No.2(d) is given 6 weeks time to engage new Advocate as a last chance. If new Advocate is not engaged within 6 weeks, appropriate ex-parte order may be passed in the matter. 4. Stand over to 07.09.2026.” 3. On 07.09.2026, the following order was passed: “1. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that affidavit placing on record the returned packet, is already filed. Registry to verify and make necessary endorsement on next date. 2. Despite last order dated 27.07.2026, no new Advocate seems to have been engaged on behalf of the Petitioners. 3. Stand over to 16.09.2026. To be listed for ‘dismissal’.” 4. Today, nobody is appearing for the Petitioners. As already Navnath Waghmare 2 4-WP-679-2000.doc noted, no new advocate is engaged on behalf of the Petitioners. It appears that the Petitioners are not interested to proceed with the matter any further. 5. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non prosecution. Interim/ ad interim relief, if any, stands vacated. 6. All concerned to act on duly authenticated or digitally signed copy of this order. (M.M. SATHAYE, J.) Navnath Waghmare 3