( 1 ). The respondent appears.

( 2 ). Leave granted.

( 3 ). The order under challenge was passed by a division bench of the High court at Bombay on a review application in the following circumstances.

( 4 ). On 19-12-1997, on a special leave petition [slp (C) No. 22776 of a 1997] filed by the appellant against the respondent, the following order was passed:

"the division bench of the High court at Bombay has, in the judgment and order under appeal, noted that the petitioner and the respondent had in an earlier writ petition, jointly filed, pleaded that the deed whose construction is relevant here is a sale and not a lease. The high court took the view that this pleading was sufficient to reach the conclusion that the deed is an agreement for a sale. We have been shown the relevant averments in the earlier writ petition. It appears that the High court has not considered whether the admission is of a sale or an agreement to sell. We think that, in the circumstances, the petitioner should move the division bench of the high court in this behalf, by the convenient means of a review petition. We make it clear that the High court shall decide, after hearing parties on the review petition,