GPN-J-332-ARHCB-8_94-13,10,500-ALA4. SPL.H.C.A.S.C.D. 79e. FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 145 OF 2004 REVISION APPLICATION NO. 145 OF 2004 REVISION APPLICATION NO. 145 OF 2004 Bajaj Auto Ltd. ....Applicant. versus Mrs. Sharayu Jugalkishore Gupta & ors....Respondents. ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- Office Notes, Office Memorada Court‘s or Judge‘s orders or directions and Orders. Registrar‘s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Tejas Deshpande for J.R. Ganbavale for the petitioner. Mrs. Vinita V. Bakre -Shastri for the respondent no.1. CORAM; CORAM; CORAM; R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR, J. R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR, J. R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR, J. DTAED; DTAED; DTAED; 20TH DECEMBER, 2004 20TH DECEMBER, 2004 20TH DECEMBER, 2004. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard. 2. Considering the fact that the impugned order is an interlocatory order, passed by the lower appellate court, during the pendency of the appeal, the question of interference therein, in exercise of section 115 CPC does not arise and hence the Revision Application is rejected. *****