1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Letters Patent Appeal No.304 of 2007 In Writ Petition No.3452 of 2007 (Decided) [Rashidkhan Abdulkhan Pathan .vrs. Smt. Kavita Suhas Malewar and others] ........................................................................................................................................................ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................... CORAM :K.J. ROHEE AND R.C. CHAVAN, JJ. DATED :NOVEMBER 29, 2007. Heard Mr. S.P. Kshirsagar, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. K.B. Dave, Advocate for the respondents. We have perused the written statement filed by the tenant-appellant as well as the application for amending the appeal memo moved by him before the appellate court. All that we could gather from the written statement of the tenant- appellant is that he did not specifically deny the title of the landlord. No issue was framed in respect of the ownership of the landlord. The tenant-appellant allowed the suit to proceed and by way of amendment 2 of the memo of appeal, he wanted to insert several things which were not there in the original written statement. Thus, we see nothing illegal in the judgment of the learned Single Judge as well as the appellate Court. The L.P.A. is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE asg