03-SA-348-2002.doc Arjun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.348 OF 2002 Sampat Mahadeo Jadhav …Appellant Versus Bapu Pandu Chavan …Respondents Since deceased by his legal heirs and representatives, 1a. Ramchandra Bapu Chavan & Ors. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.454 OF 2002 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.348 OF 2002 Sampat Mahadeo Jadhav …Applicant Versus Bapu Pandu Chavan …Respondents Since deceased by his legal heirs and representatives, 1a. Ramchandra Bapu Chavan & Ors. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.707 OF 2005 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.348 OF 2002 Sampat Mahadeo Jadhav …Applicant Versus Bapu Pandu Chavan …Respondents Since deceased by his legal heirs and representatives, 1a. Ramchandra Bapu Chavan & Ors. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (ST) NO.4756 OF 2006 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.348 OF 2002 Bapu Pandu Chavan …Applicants Since deceased by his legal heirs and representatives, 1a. Ramchandra Bapu Chavan & Ors. Versus Sampat Mahadeo Jadhav …Respondent 1 ARJUN VITTHAL KUDHEKAR Digitally signed by ARJUN VITTHAL KUDHEKAR Date: 2025.07.22 19:26:14 +0530 03-SA-348-2002.doc _______________________________________________________________ Mr. S. T. Bhosale i/b Dilip Bodake, for the Appellant. _______________________________________________________________ CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED: 22 JULY 2025 P.C.: 1. Mr. Bhosale, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant states that despite contacting the Appellant on telephone as well as by sending communications, the Appellant is not responding and accordingly no further steps could be taken. Mr. Bhosale, learned Counsel states that therefore, Advocate of the Appellant is not in a position to take steps in accordance with the Order dated 3rd January 2024 passed by a learned Single Judge. 2. Accordingly, Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. 3. As the Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution, the Civil Applications/Interim Applications, if any, also stands dismissed. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] 2