1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 52 OF 2010 IN CRA 126/2009 Syed Tasskeen Pasha s/o. Syed Nathan Pasha and others. ...Appellant Versus Syed Shah Salahuddin s/o. Yousufiddin Quadri Inamdar ..Respondent ..... Mr. S.S. Kazi , advocate for the applicant Mr. R.T. Rathod, advocate for respondent ..... CORAM: K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. DATED: 5TH APRIL, 2010 PER COURT:- 1] Heard. 2] The review petition is preferred by the original defendant, seeking review of the order dated 25/1/2010, whereby injunction was granted in favour of the plaintiff. 3] Mr. Kazi submits that the observations of this court about the supply of sugar cane, made the defendants to cause search and in February, 2010, they have collected certain receipts of depositing sugarcane to the factory drawn from the field in question and hence, the order, according to him, needs review. 2 4] During the course of the submissions, Mr. Kazi, accepts, clamping the injunction was not alone on receipt of possession of the sugarcane, but this court considered the payment of revenue, the development at site and other 3 factors. 5] In the above situation, I do not see that there is any error on the part of this court in passing the order dated 25/1/2010. It even cannot be said that the receipt could not be produced even after exercise of due diligence. The court considered all the avenues in the matter and then only injunction was clamped. Review application is dismissed. (K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.) GRT/