1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICUATURE AT MUMBAI ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 182 OF 2010 IN REVIEW PETITION (LODG.) NO. 21 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 461 OF 2003 Babubhai Koli proprietor of M/s. Arise Advertisers. .. ... Petitioner. Versus The Board of Trustees of the Port of Mumbai & Ors. .. ... Respondents. Mr. Kirit J. Hakani with Mr. Rahul K. Hakani for the Petitioner. Mr. U. J. Makhija, Sr. Counsel with Mr. Rahul Khandekar i/by M/s. Little & Co., for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : F. I. REBELLO & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 30TH APRIL, 2010 P. C.: There is a delay of 2020 days in preferring the review petition. In our opinion, no cause is shown for condoning the said delay. 2. Apart from that, the issue is whether on adjustment any monies are due and payable. It will be always open to the review 2 petitioner to take out proceedings as petitioner may be entitled to in law, if the respondents are seeking to recover amount, if not due and payable. 3. With the above observations, notice of motion is dismissed. Sd/- (F.I. REBELLO,J.) Sd/- (A. A. SAYED, J.) 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICUATURE AT MUMBAI ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (LODG.) NO. 21 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 461 OF 2003 Babubhai Koli proprietor of M/s. Arise Advertisers. .. ... Petitioner. Versus The Board of Trustees of the Port of Mumbai & Ors. .. ... Respondents. Mr. Kirit J. Hakani with Mr. Rahul K. Hakani for the Petitioner. Mr. U. J. Makhija, Sr. Counsel with Mr. Rahul Khandekar i/by M/s. Little & Co., for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : F. I. REBELLO & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 30TH APRIL, 2010 P. C.: As the notice of motion for condonation of delay in filing the review petition itself is dismissed, the review petition also stands dismissed. Sd/- (F.I. REBELLO,J.) Sd/- (A. A. SAYED, J.)