Smt. Meera W/O Tushid Wasnik v. Shrawan S/O Pandurang Nandkar And Others

2025:BHC-NAG:3374 52.mca.883.24 1/1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Civil Application [MCA[ No.883 of 2024 in Writ Petition No.6298 of 2023 (D) Smt. Meera w/o Tushid Wasnik vs.

Shrawan s/o Pandurang Nandkar and others =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Mr. B.B. Pantawane, Advocate for the Applicant/Petitioner. None for the Non-Applicants/Respondents.

CORAM

: ANIL L. PANSARE, J.

DATE : 1 st APRIL, 2025.

The review is sought on the ground that certain law points, which ought to have been argued, have not been argued. 02.

When enquired as to, why the law points were not argued, learned Counsel for the applicant submits that another Counsel has argued the matter, who did not point out certain provisions of law. 03.

This cannot be a ground to review the order considering limited scope of review. The review application is, therefore, rejected. No costs. (Anil L. Pansare, J.) *sandesh