1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR L.P. A. No. 94/2011 in Writ Petition No. 5880/2010 Smt. Shantabai Pandurangji Pawar and others Vs. Madhukar s/o Gulabrao Kalbande Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. A. P. Wachasundar, Advocate for the appellants. CORAM: S.A. BOBDE & S.B. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : 14TH MARCH, 2011. Heard. We see no reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has refused to stay the order of the Appellate Court granting stay to the execution of the judgment and decree pending the Appeal under Section 34 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that there is a difference to scope of an appeal under Section 34 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 and an Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of the Civil Procedure. Even if that be so, it would not affect the question of stay. The learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that the learned Single Judge ought to have seen that the Appellate Court only has to see whether stay should be granted and that stay should not be granted. The consideration of the question why stay should be granted 2 includes in this case both the considerations. There is no merit in this LPA which arises from an interim order. The LPA stands dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE Ambulkar.