31-CRA-404-2010.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 404 OF 2010 Madhukar Vasudev Soman ...Applicant Versus Mangala Dattatray Salvi And Others ...Respondents __________________________________________________________ None for the Applicant. Mr. Sumit Kothari, Advocate for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 24th September, 2026. P.C. : 1. By the present Application, the Applicant has sought for the following substantive relief in terms of prayer clause (c) :- c. After examining the legality, and propriety of the Judgement and Decree passed by the Ld. District Judge-1, Khed in Regular Civil Appeal No.99/2003 dated 22.02.2010, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the same and be pleased to dismiss the Regular Civil Appeal No.99/2003 filed by the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein and Judgement and Decree passed by the Ld. Civil Judge Junior Division, Khed in Regular Civil Suit No.48 of 1985 dated 03.04.2002 may kindly be confirmed/upheld. 2. On 19.08.2026, the following order was passed :- 1. This Revision Application is of the year 2010. 2. When the matter was called out, neither the Applicant nor the Advocate for the Applicant is present, either physically or through video conferencing mode. 3. Mr. Sumit Kothari, learned Advocate for the Respondents is present. 4. To afford an opportunity to the Arjun 1 31-CRA-404-2010.doc Applicant/Advocate for the Applicant to appear, as a matter of indulgence, list the matter on 24th September 2026 under the caption "For Dismissal”. 3. Today, name of the Applicant was called out by the Shirestedar. Neither the Applicant (Madhukar Vasudev Soman) nor the Advocate on record for the Applicant (Surel Shah) are present in Court, either physically or through VC mode. 4. Mr. Sumit Kothari, learned Advocate for the Respondents, on instructions from the Respondents submit that the subject matter of this Application is settled amongst the Applicant (Landlord) and the Respondents (Tenants). 5. Apparently, in view of the settlement, the Applicant has lost interest in these proceedings. 6. In the wake of the above, Civil Revision Application No. 404 of 2010, is dismissed for non-prosecution. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) Arjun 2 ARJUN KRISHNA RODGE Digitally signed by ARJUN KRISHNA RODGE Date: 2026.09.29 10:36:00 +0530