(-1-) MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO.36 OF 2006 IN APPEAL NO.451 OF 2005 IN’ COMPANY PETITION NO.650 OF 2004 Quadricon Pvt. Ltd. ..Petitioners Vs. Sugam Constructions Pvt. Ltd.....Respondent Mr. Z. Andhyarjina with Mr. Hitesh S. Jain i/b. Thakordas & Madgavkar,for the Petitioners. Mr. K.P. Jain with Mr. P.V. Shah for the Respondent. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO & REBELLO & REBELLO & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATED: 14th September,2007 DATED: 14th September,2007 DATED: 14th September,2007 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The principal contention as has been urged now is that in the statutory notice served on the company a demand was made in respect of amounts which could not have been claimed under the Award. Such a contention was not raised in reply to the company petition or before this Court in the Appeal. 2. Considering the above in our opinion it is not possible to countenance such an argument in Review. 3. The impugned order, therefore, does not (-2-) suffer from any error apparent on the face of the record. Consequently Application for review dismissed. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)