1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR L.P.A.NO.393 OF 2010 IN W.P.NO.5487 OF 2009. Smt.Tarabai Rameshwear Sharma ..vs.. Smt.Shakuntalabai Shaligram Chourasiya and ors. =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr.Shyam Dewani Adv. for the appellant. C ORAM : J.P.DEVADHAR AND A.B.CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATED : 12th October, 2010. Heard. Shri Dewani, learned counsel for the appellant, has vehemently argued that the review jurisdiction exercised by appellate/review authority was without jurisdiction and therefore, though the case is one of dispute between the landlady and tenant, it does not fall within the ambit of judgment recorded by this court in L.P.A.No.150/2010 (Kalpesh Hemantbhai Shah ..vs.. Manhar Auto Sotres and ors.), dated 1 st October, 2010. We do not agree. Admittedly, there is dispute between the landlady and tenant. The question whether or not the permission under C.P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 granted to the landlady could be set aside in review is not material, since it is not that there is no power 2 of review under the C.P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949. Clause 21(2-a) of the Rent Control Order, 1949 provides for a power of review and therefore, it cannot be said that it was without jurisdiction or an error of jurisdiction. Resultantly, we find that the present Letters Patent Appeal would not be maintenable in the light of our Judgment in L.P.A.No.150 of 2010 (Kalpesh Hemantbhai Shah ..vs.. Manhar Auto Sotres and ors.), dated 1 st October, 2010. In the result, we hold that the Letters Patent Appeal is not maintenable and we thus dismiss the same with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE. pzc