:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 29 OF 2004 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 29 OF 2004 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 29 OF 2004 IN IN IN REVIEW PETITION STAMP NO. 19249 OF 2003 REVIEW PETITION STAMP NO. 19249 OF 2003 REVIEW PETITION STAMP NO. 19249 OF 2003 IN IN IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4345 OF 1994 WRIT PETITION NO. 4345 OF 1994 WRIT PETITION NO. 4345 OF 1994 Mumbai Agricultural Produce ..Applicants Market Committee (Ori.Resp.No.1) versus M/s. Vallabhdas Tejpal & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. Y. R. Naik for the Applicants - Original Respondent No.1 in the Writ Petition. Mr. R. A. Rodriques for the Respondent No.1 / Original Petitioner in the Writ Petition. Mr. S. K. Chinchalikar for the Respondent No.2 - State. CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE, & CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE, & CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE, & SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. DATE : 25TH APRIL, 2007. DATE : 25TH APRIL, 2007. DATE : 25TH APRIL, 2007. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard. 2. This is an Application for condonation of delay of 76 days. Delay is satisfactorily explained. Respondent No.1 / Original Petitioner has no serious objection, therefore delay is :2: condoned. Application is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 3. Rule on Review Petition. Office to number the Review Petition. 4. Counsels agree that prayer (b) of the Review Petition can be granted to the Applicants / Original Respondent No.1. Therefore, we grant prayer (b) of the Review Petition. Rule answered accordingly. No order as to costs of this Review Petition. (SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (D.G. DESHPANDE, J.) (SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (D.G. DESHPANDE, J.) (SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (D.G. DESHPANDE, J.)