Shaikh Aziza Parveen Shaikh Hafeez And ANR v. Mohd. Qusro Mohd. Khaleel And ORS

( 1 ) CA2597.13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2597 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13964 OF 2013 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.172 OF 2012 Shaikh Aziza Parveen W/o.

Shaikh Hafeez and another ..Applicant

Versus

Mohd. Qusro S/o. Mohd. Khaleel ..Respondent Mr.A.P.Bhandari, Advocate for the Applicant.

Mr.A.D.Kasliwal, Advocate for the R - 1,2,4,5 & 7. CORAM : A.V.NIRGUDE, J.

DATED :

02.09.2015 P.C. :- 1.

Heard.

2.

The order under review rejected civil revision application holding that review applicants were not entitled to carry on construction work on the suit site. One of the reasons assigned for coming to such conclusion was the fact that the applicants had not secured Municipal Corporation permission to carry on construction and yet they had started the work.

( 2 ) CA2597.13 3.

Learned counsel for the applicants sought review of the order on the ground that his client have now secured Municipal Corporation's permission for the construction work.

4.

In spite of this change in the situation which is favourable to the applicants, I am not inclined to change my view on facts of the case. There are several other reasons mentioned in the order which went against the applicants.

5.

The Review Application stands disposed of accordingly.

6.

In view above, connected civil application for bringing on record legal representatives does not survive and disposed of.

[A.V. NIRGUDE, J.] VishalK/CA2597.13