1 RP8.10.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO. 8 OF 2010 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 144 OF 2009 Dnyanu Babaji Jankar. ... Petitioner. (Orig. Applicant/Defendant) V/s. Pandu Babaji Jankar. ... Respondent. (Orig. Respondent/Plaintiff) Mr. Amit Sale for the Petitioner. Mr. Mahindra Deshmukh for the Respondent. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 10th AUGUST 2010. P.C. :- Heard learned Advocate Mr. Amit Sale for the Petitioner – Original Appellant and Mr. Mahindra Deshmukh for the Respondent. The review is sought against Judgment and Order dated 8th April 2009 passed in Second Appeal No.144 of 2009 whereby the Second Appeal came to be dismissed at the stage of admission. 2. Learned Advocate for the Petitioner tried to take me through paragraph 3 and offered his comments as to how the payment of taxes is made. It need not be repeated that production of record mentioning name of the Petitioner in the 2 RP8.10.sxw gram panchayat record by itself does not confirm the ownership of structure. Same is the position as regards housing taxes. Both the Courts below concurrently held that the impugned structure is improperly constructed by the Petitioner and does not belong to him. In my view, looking to the nature of the dispute, no case is made out for grant of review application and the same is dismissed at the stage of admission with no order as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO, J.)