1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. Review Petition No.1 of 2009 IN Notice of Motion No.432 of 2007 IN Suit No.2891 of 2007 Kanayalal Kashiram Kasat & ors. .. .. Plaintiffs v/s. Hemlata Madhusudan Thakur & ors. .. Defendants Ms.Seema Sarnaik for Plaintiffs. Mr.D.A.Bharot for Defendants. ------ CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. Dated : 16th February 2009 P.C. : 1.This Review Petition is filed on the ground that the Plaintiffs were not entitled to sign and have no authority to execute the Deed of Declaration executed in December 1997 which has been considered in the Notice of Motion. Since the document has been considered upon hearing, the review sought on the ground of lack of authority does not lie. 2.The Review Petition is further filed upon the fact that a document, which has been considered in the Notice of Motion being the Deed of Conveyance dated 20th March 1997, was not registered. The Advocate for the Plaintiffs 2 states that the registered document was relied upon in the Affidavit-in-reply of Defendant No.3, but was not brought to the notice of the Court. She has now brought it to the notice of the Court. The registration is rather peculiar. What is stated to be a registered document is now shown to be consisting of 2 additional pages being the receipt of fees of registration and the last page on which the endorsement of the Sub-Registrar of Assurances is put. The document does not yet show the stamp of the Sub-Registrar of Assurances on each page as is the normal practice. In any event, that is not the document on which the Plaintiffs based their title. The unregistered franked document was considered in the order passed in the Notice of Motion. The other points agitated by the Plaintiffs are not, therefore, considered. The case for review is not made out. The Review Petition is dismissed. (SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.)