1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 9. CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.153/2008 (VITHAL NARAYAN SONAR and others V/S FATEMOHAMMAD JAN MOHAMMAD RAJ -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr. J.H.Deshmukh, Adv., for the petitioner. Mr.L.V.Sangit, Adv., for respondent (sole). ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE: 8-2-2010 P.C.:- l. Heard Mr. Deshmukh and Mr. Sangit, Counsel for respective parties. 2. The order of remand recorded by the learned Principal District Judge, dt.26.9.2008, is assailed by the revisional applicant on the ground that the learned Principal District Judge did not consider the ongoing litigation in respect of the very property to be Wakf Property, and there was a big question mark to the status of the respondent herein to be landlord of the property. Civil Revision 2 Application No.141/2005 is pending before this Court between the persons claiming property as Wakf and challenging the same, involving the suit property. 3. Learned Principal District Judge, Beed, having gone through the order of the Rent Controller, has observed in para 20 that the constructed shop is not a Wakf property and he directed the Rent Controller to decide the point in respect of the default by the tenant under Section 12(2)(i) of the Act, holding that he has jurisdiction to decide it. Considering these aspects, the order of remand to the learned Rent Controller, does not require any interference. Needless to mention, the parties are at option to address to the learned Rent Controller about pendency of Civil Revision Application, referred above, and get appropriate directions. 3 Civil Revision Application is dismissed. No costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/153-08cra