1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR MCA NO. 416 OF 2009 IN CRA NO. 50 OF 2008 (Natthu Marotrao Dharmik vs. Smt. Kalawati Ghanshyam Lanjewar) 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. APRIL 01, 2009. Heard Shri Jetha, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Bhangde, learned counsel for the respondent. The plaintiff is seeking review of judgment dated 22.8.2008 delivered by me in Civil Revision Application No.50 of 2008. The suit filed was for specific performance and it was found that the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur, could not have entertained said suit as property was situated in Saoner Tahsil. The judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Harshad Chimanlal Modi vs. DLF Universal & Anr., reported at 2005 (7) Scale 533, was applied and acted upon by this Court for holding that the judgment and decree was nullity. The review is sought by relying upon the judgment of this Court in Shantabai vs. Mariambi, reported at 1990 Mh. L.J. 771. There the Court was 2 not called upon to consider the provisions of Section 16(d) of Civil Procedure Code and challenge was about the territorial jurisdiction and, therefore, provisions of Section 21 of Civil Procedure Code were applicable. The suit was for recovery of amount of Rs.5,800/- and it was decreed ex parte by the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur. The defendant was resident of Katol i.e. beyond the area of said Court and the cause of action also had not arisen at Nagpur. However, it is apparent that the provisions of Section 16(d) of CPC were not relevant in said adjudication. The judgment, therefore, has no bearing on present controversy. In view of this, no case for review is made out. MCA is, therefore, rejected. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.