1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.9566 OF 2009 IN RAST NO. 17189 OF 2009 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 1281 OF 2005 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders 1. Heard Shri N.K.Tungar, Advocate for the applicant and Advocate Shri B.S. Kudale for Respondent No.1. 2. This is an application praying for condonation of delay in filing review application, as also for review of the order passed on 9.4.2009 disposing of Second Appeal No.1281 of 2005. 2 3. On 9.4.2009, after hearing both sides, this court disposed of above Second Appeal No.1281 of 2005. In paragraph 6 of the order, the court observed certain circumstances which led this court to come to the conclusion that the appellant is not entitled to the grant of specific performance. Then in paragraph 8, question of refund of amount was considered and this court arrived at a conclusion that refund should have been of Rs.7,500/= being the amount mentioned in the agreement of sale and not Rs.3,000/=. In paragraph 9 of the order, the court noted the submission of Advocate Shri Kudale for Respondent No. 1 that his client is ready to deposit the amount of Rs.7,500/=. 3 4. In view of above admission and statement on behalf of Respondent No.1, the Second Appeal was disposed of with directions to pay amount of Rs.7,500/= in stead of Rs.3,000/=. 5. After decision in Second Appeal as above on 9.4.2009, this court had an occasion to consider civil application No.4905 of 2009 in a disposed of Second Appeal No.1281 of 2005. This civil application was filed by Respondent No. 1. At that time, Advocate for the present applicant, so also respondent, were heard and after considering their submissions and the extract of register from the court of Additional District Judge, Hingoli showing that the amount of Rs.7,530/= was deposited, this court disposed of the said civil application No.4905 of 2009 on 7.5.2009 thereby 4 modifying earlier order dated 9.4.2009 passed in Second Appeal. 6. If present applicant had any objection to the order dated 9.4.2009, he ought to have raised the same when Civil Application No.4905 of 2009 was disposed of on 7.5.2009. 7. This is not a case for entertaining review. Hence, civil application seeking review of the order dated 9.4.2009 is dismissed and disposed of accordingly. Date:16/09/2009 (P.R.BORKAR, J.) pnd/ca9566.09