1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 826 OF 2005 IN SA 490 OF 2003 (Nankulal Ramkumar Patalbansi vs. Bhagwatiprasad Gajadhar Sharma & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JANUARY 19, 2009. Heard Shri De, learned counsel for the applicant/ original appellant and Shri Saboo, learned counsel for the non-applicant/ original respondents in Second Appeal No. 490 of 2003. Second Appeal No. 490 of 2003 is disposed of by this Court on 27.09.2005 after noticing that the Civil Court was required to consider whether the respondents or appellant was owner of property. It, therefore, found that Section 111(g) of Transfer of Property Act, was not relevant. It has also relied upon the judgment of Isak Mahamad Wagale vs. Jainuddin Mohamad Yusuif Mulla & Ors., reported at 2005 (3) Mh. L.J. 1116. Shri De, learned counsel has argued that the said judgment relies upon another judgment of learned Single Judge and the earlier judgment in the case of Vidyavardhak Sangh Co. vs. Ayyappa, reported at 1925 Bom. 524 considers situation when 2 provisions of Transfer of Property Act, were not in force. He contends that the specific plea of present respondent was that he inducted present applicant as tenant and as such the notice under Section 111(g) of Transfer of Property Act was essential. After hearing the learned counsel, I find that the issue has been considered by this Court and it is to be noted that the present applicant in fact set up a hostile title by pointing out that he had purchased the suit property from defendant No.1. In these circumstances, there is no error in the consideration by this Court to attract the review jurisdiction. No case for review is, therefore, made out. It is rejected. Shri De, learned counsel states that the interim orders are operating in the matter and the same may be continued for a period of eight weeks. Shri Saboo, learned counsel opposes the prayer. However, considering the circumstances, I am inclined to continue interim order. Accordingly, interim order to continue till 22nd March 2009 and shall cease to operate automatically thereafter. JUDGE *GS.