1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 327 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2821 OF 2008 (Ravindra D. Ahirkar .v. Ravikishore Ramkishnaji Pashine and another) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri R.M. Ahirrao, Advocate for the appellant. Shri V.G. Palshikar, Advocate for the respondents. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 18TH NOVEMBER, 2008 Heard. Apart from other grounds, there is clear finding recorded by the appellate Court after appreciating the evidence on record that the tenant has erected the structure without written permission for construction of the landlord. Admittedly, no written consent for permanent construction has been produced on record. What was produced on record was that the no objection from the landlord for starting the cloth business. The appellate Court has observed that the said document cannot be treated as written consent for erection of permanent structure by the tenant. It is essentially a finding of fact which is based on evidence on record and, therefore, no fault can be 2 found with the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge. There is no substance in the appeal. The Letters Patent Appeal is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.