3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 35 OF 2011 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 509 OF 2010 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. M.P.Harjule ,Advocate for the applicant. .......................... CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 14/03/2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The present Review application is filed by the original plaintiffs, who are appellants in Second Appeal. 3. The Suit of the plaintiff for injunction in respect 6 Acres 10 gunthas of land was dis-allowed and an injunction was granted in respect of only 5 Acres 3 gunthas. The Court, taking into account the sale of various lands by the plaintiff, had restricted the injunction in favour of the plaintiff to the extent of 5 Acres 3 gunthas. In Second Appeal 3 also, the Judgments passed by the Courts below were were up held. 4. Mr. Harjule, the learned counsel for the review applicants submits that the sale deeds dated 13/4/1966 and 20/3/1970 have been found by the plaintiffs, which would substantiate the case of the plaintiff and which would show that the plaintiff would be entitled for the relief of injunction in respect of the total amount as claimed by the plaintiffs. According to the learned counsel, the said sale deeds were found subsequently and as such could not be filed before the Courts below or even in this Court at the time of arguing Second Appeal. As such, the learned counsel states that the Judgment of the Second Appeal be reviewed. 5. The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 114 read with Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure is in a very narrow compass. The same is to be exercised only in the case of error apparent on the face of record. While entertaining the review application, this Court can not sit as an appellate authority over the Judgment delivered in the Second Appeal. The sale deeds sought to be relied were not the part of record before the Courts below nor they were filed with the Second Appeal. In light of the same, the said sale deeds can not be 3 considered. In view of the various transactions entered by the plaintiff, the finding was arrived at that the plaintiff would be only entitled for the injunction to the extent of 5 Acres 3 gunthas and the said injunction was granted. 6. In that light of the matter, as the Judgment in Second Appeal does not suffer from any error apparent on the face of record, the review application is rejected however with no order as to costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J. ] KNP/RA 35.2011 in SA 509.2010