1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CAO No. 437 of 2011 in Company Petition no. 3/10 M/s Mahadeo Land Developers Private Limited Versus Shri Sanjay Bhayyaji Nimbulkar and Others. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr.Syam Dewani, learned counsel for applicant. Mr. D.V. Dhondarkar, learned counsel for non-applicants. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : APRIL 8 , 2011 . Heard Shri Dewani, the learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Dhondarkar for the non-applicants. The learned counsel for the non-applicants does not seriously oppose the prayers made in the civil application. Hence, for the reasons stated in the civil application the delay of 88 days in filing the review application is condoned. Civil Application is allowed and disposed of. MCA(Review) No. 5345/2011 Heard Shri Dewani for the applicant and Shri Dhondarkar for the non-applicants. It is stated by the applicant in the review application that the notice as contemplated under section 433 and 434 of the Companies Act was not served on the applicant and hence the company petition was not tenable. The said ground was not raised 2 before this court when the order dated 21.12.2010, which is sought to be reviewed, was passed. No ground has also been made out to point out that the observation that the petition is not pre-mature is incorrect and suffers from an error apparent on the face of record. Hence, the application is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE Hirekhan