1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CAO No. 253 of 2011 In MCA (St) No. 20158 of 2010 Abhiman v. Smt Kantabai and ors -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr P.N. Kendurkar, adv for applicant Coram: B. P. Dharmadhikari, J Dated: 3rd October 2011 1. Heard. A petition filed by present applicant under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India was dismissed in motion hearing after recording a finding that application under Order 39, rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure was moved six years after institution of suit and trial Court as also Appellate Court had rightly appreciated the controversy. 2. Thereafter review application has been filed under Section 114 of CPC on 22.11.2010 along with prayer for condonation of delay. Application for condonation of delay has been filed on 24.12.2010. Matter was not moved thereafter. It was listed on 5.5.2011 and then came to be adjourned. So, almost after ten months of filing of said application, matter is before the Court. 3. Only respondents are private parties. 4. It is, therefore, apparent that the grievance has been 2 corrected appreciated by this Court. Effort is only to keep the issue burning by filing application for review and by moving application for condonation of delay. 5. Application rejected. Judge joshi