1 ra 92.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 92 OF 2011 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 80 OF 1984 Digambar Mhaisaji and others .. Applicants Versus Ambubai W/o Marya and others .. Respondents Shri A. S. Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicants. Shri A. M. Dabir, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 19TH APRIL, 2011. PER COURT : . This is an application seeking review of the judgment and order dated 09 th March, 1993 passed by this Court in Second Appeal No. 80 of 1984. The learned Single Judge of this Court had dismissed the second appeal. 2. Shri Deshmukh, the learned counsel for applicants contends that, Kerya died before the commencement of Hindu Succession Act and that defendant No. 2 had became the full 2 ra 92.11 owner and the plaintiff therefore, had no share. This fact had not been considered by this Court while passing the impugned judgment. 3. I have gone through the judgment. The scope of this Court in entertaining the review petition U/Sec. 114 of the Civil Procedure Code is in a very narrow compass. Perusal of the judgment shows that this Court has observed that the appellants i. e. review petitioners could not prove that Kerya died prior to 1956. Moreover, there was an admission on the part of defendant No. 1 about relinquishment of her share in the suit land. 4. The judgment does not involve any error apparent on the face of record, as such the present review application is dismissed. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/April 11