1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9043/2008 (M/s. Saba Sons Corporation and another vs. Mohsinbhai Mazhar Hussain and another ) CORAM : B.P.Dhamadhikari, J. DATE : 5 th DECEMBER, 2008 Heard Advocate Shrivastava, for the applicant. I have also hear the matter on merits. As I am not inclined to interfere in the matter on merits, I have not ordered any notice to the otherside on application for condonation of delay. Argument of Advocate Shrivastava is that, this Court could not have issued mandamus because prayer is only seeking mandamus and therefore, matter pertains to Division Bench. He further states that appeal since 1990 is pending before the Appellate Authority. The prayer in writ petition was to quash and set aside the stay granted by the Appellate Authority and in the alternative to expedite the hearing. This court did not find it proper to interfere in the matter by vacating stay and therefore, the matter was expedited after noticing the fact that the landlord has approached the Rent Controller in 1986-87 2 I, therefore, do not find any case made out warranting review. The application for condonation of delay, as also M.C.A. for review are, therefore, rejected. JUDGE Rvjalit