' TARIQ SHAMIM, J.-Through this Intra-Court appeal, the appellants have assailed the order of learned Single Judge A dated 9-1-2006 whereby the writ petition of the appellants seeking setting aside of the order dated 13-12-2005 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge/Election Tribunal, U.C. 14, Ferozewala was dismissed.
2. The petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge while observing as under:- ' "The petitioners tried to drag their feet and did not file written statement without any rhyme or reason. No justification has been shown as to why written statement was not filed on several dates of hearing when petition was posted for this very purpose. On two occasions, last opportunities were given to petitioners for filing of written statement. They did not bother to file written statement.
They had not paid even the costs subject to payment of which hearing of petition was postponed on 3-12-2005 to 12-12-2005.
' The order passed by the Election Tribunal shows that counsel for the parties had appeared before the Tribunal on 13-12-2005 which belies the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners that they were given the next date of hearing as 14-12-2005 by Reader of the Election Tribunal. In case date was given as 14-12-2005, there was no occasion for counsel for the petitioners to have appeared before the Election Tribunal on 12-12-2005. This is a lame excuse and has been taken only for the sake, of argument. Petitioners, by their own conduct, had disentitled them for further hearing in the matter. The order passed by the Election Tribunal is neither contrary to law on the subject nor has violated the principle of natural justice. The substantive and procedural due process has been duly complied with by the Election Tribunal. The order passed by the Election Tribunal is not without jurisdiction and cannot be interfered with in the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court."
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and respondents Nos.2 and 3 we have found absolutely no error or illegality in the orders of the learned single Judge and would in fact reaffirm the view taken therein. Further, the learned counsel for the appellants has not been able to satisfy" us as to the maintainability of the instant Intra-Court appeal.
4. For what has been discussed above we do not find any reason or justification to interfere in the impugned order. Resultantly, the appeal being without any force is dismissed in limine.