1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Civil Application No. 626 of 2008 IN Misc. Civil Application [Review] St. No. 726 of 2008 IN Writ Petition No.6536 of 2005 [decided] [Y.N. Kanadiya Vs. State of Mah. & ors.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mrs. Anita Shinde, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. J.B. Jaiswal, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI AND R.V.MORE,JJ. DATE : 27th March,2008. Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 196 days caused in filing of Misc. Civil Application is condoned. Judge Judge |Hedau| 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Misc. Civil Application [Review] St. No. 726 of 2008 IN Writ Petition No.6536 of 2005 [decided] [Y.N. Kanadiya Vs. State of Mah. & ors.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mrs. Anita Shinde, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. J.B. Jaiswal, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI AND R.V.MORE,JJ. DATE : 27th March,2008. Heard. In the midst of hearing, learned Advocate Mrs. Anita Shinde states that since the applicant-petitioner wants to pursue his caste of Lohar, he does not want to press this application. Application is disposed of as withdrawn. Judge Judge |Hedau| 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Civil Application No. 658 of 2007 IN Civil Revision Application St. No. 17842 of 2006 [A.M. Mohota Vs. L.R. Shende] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. M.M. Agnihotri, Advocate for the applicant. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 26th March,2008. Heard. It is seen that the delay is caused due to filing of proceedings which were not maintainable. Delay of 1387 days is condoned. 4 Judge |Hedau| IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Civil Revision Application St. No. 17842 of 2006 [A.M. Mohota Vs. L.R. Shende] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. M.M. Agnihotri, Advocate for the applicant. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 26th March,2008. 1. Heard. 2. The applicant has suffered a decree passed by the First Appellate Court reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 30th October, 2002 passed by the Trial Court in Regular Civil Suit No. 177 of 1995. 3. It was the plaintiff's suit for recovery of Rs. 11,151-00 towards rent and 5 interest etc.. 4. The First Appellate Court has recorded a finding that the suit claim is vague and it is not proved. The finding recorded in Para 11 of the Judgment reads as follows:- “11. In view of the above discussion, it is clear that the respondent was not successful in proving the fact that the respondent is the landlord, and that the rent is due for the period 1-1-93 to 31-12-1995 from the appellant as claimed, therefore, the submissions by the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent is entitled for judgment and decree in his favour cannot be accepted. ....” 5. The challenge to this finding is raised, alleging illegality. It is not shown as to how the Judgment is perverse. 6. There are limitations on interference in the revisional jurisdiction. There is no error of law or of jurisdiction creeping in. 7. Civil Revision Application has no merit. It is, therefore, dismissed. Judge |Hedau| 6