-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIION Writ Petition No. 108 of 2004 Shri Laxmibai Harish Vhatkar ..Petitioner vs. Gopal Tukaram Bandivdekar and others ..Respondents Smt.P.O.Badadare for petitioner. Shri A.R.Patne, A.G.P. for respondent State CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 22nd NOVEMBER, 2007 22nd NOVEMBER, 2007 22nd NOVEMBER, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Smt.Badadare appearing for the petitioner. Perused the impugned order. 2. To my mind if the petitioner wants to have the transaction regularised, then, in terms of the subject policy, she has to pay the Nazarana for having the transaction regularised and legalised. As is clear from the order of the revisional authority, the transaction is contrary to the provisions of law as no permission has been obtained before the sale deed was executed. The petition is, therefore, devoid of any substance and is summarily dismissed. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)