1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4654 OF 2006 Ramesh Tukaram Chiddarwar & Ors. Vs. Murad Abdullabhai Dharani ........................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................... Shri F.T.Mirza, Counsel for the Respondent. CORAM : R. K.DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 20. JUNE, 2011. The respondent was granted permission under clause 13(3) (v) (vi) and (vii) of the Rent Control Order to determine the tenancy of the petitioners. The said order was challenged in Writ Petition No.5117 of 2005 and the petition was dismissed by this Court on 22.1.2007. LPA No.128 of 2008 filed against the said order was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on 15.10.2010. There is nothing on record to show that the orders passed in the said writ petition and LPA have been carried further by the petitioners. The present petition challenges the judgment and order dated 29.6.1999 passed by .....2/- 2 the learned Additional District Judge, Pusad dismissing Civil Appeal No.62 of 1994 challenging the decree passed for eviction and possession by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pusad in Small Cause Suit No.33 of 1992 on 24.6.1993. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. None for the petitioners. After going through the judgment and order passed by the Appellate Court, it is apparent that the decree for eviction and possession is in consonance with the permission granted to determine the tenancy. Hence, no fault can be found with the judgment and order impugned in this petition. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE BrWankhede ...../-