mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 880 OF 2008 IN REVIEW PETITION NO. ...... OF 2007 In WRIT PETITION NO.10194 of 2004 Laxman Tukaram Mane .. Appellant versus Bhupal Ramu Mali .. Respondent ... Mr.G.T.Kamble for the appellant Mr.Pratap Patil for respondent nos.1 to 8. Mr.Manish Jain for respondent nos.9 and 10. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 24th October 2008 P.C.: 1. Mr. Patil appears for respondent nos.1 to 8 and waives service. Mr. Jain appears for respondent nos.9 and 10 and waives service. Advocate for respondent no.9 & 10 says that he has no objection for condonation of delay. Counsel for respondent nos.1 to 8 states that they do not want to file affidavit in reply. In the circumstances, delay is condoned and civil application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). (D.G. KARNIK, J)