-1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL No. 471 OF 2006 ______________________________________________ Office Ntes, Office : Memoranda of Coram, : Court’s or Judge’s appeaances, Court’s : order orders or directions : and Registrar’s : orders : ______________________________________________ Mr. S. M. Oak Sabaad, advocate for the appellants. Mr. Bharat Mehta, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. CORAM : S. J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : AUGUST 28, 2007. PC . It appears that before the respondent authority, the appellant had consented to the variation of the scheme under the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act 1947. Both the Courts below had perused the papers and hold this to be so. Both the Courts below have -2 - further observed that the appellant had admitted that the area in the consolidation scheme was in excess of the area of the actual area in possession. Under these circumstances, the second appeal is dismissed.