Bombay High CourtWP/3749/2015dismissedrule discharged

Smt. Rajkanya Wd/O. Uttamrao Khandare And Others v. Smt. Harsha Wd/O. Mohan Khandare

2015-07-08Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 wp3749.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.3749 OF 2015.

(SMT. RAJKANYA UTTAMRAO KHANDARE & OTH..VS..SMT. HARSHA MOHAN KHANDARE.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : JULY 08, 2015.

Heard Mr.Rohit Joshi, the learned advocate for the petitioners/ original plaintiffs.

The petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging the order passed by the District Court allowing the appeal filed by the respondent and setting aside the order passed by the trial Court by which temporary injunction was granted in favour of the petitioners restraining the respondent from disturbing the possession of the petitioners over the suit field.

The submission on behalf of the petitioners is that the 7/12 extracts show the possession of the petitioners and that they are the owners of the suit field. It is submitted that the District Court has not considered the factual aspects properly and this has happened as the impugned order is passed without hearing the petitioners.

With the assistance of the learned advocate for the petitioners, I have gone through the material placed on the record of the writ petition. The learned Principal District

2 wp3749.15 Judge has recorded that the contentions of the respondent are supported by the sale deed dated 8th June, 2006. The learned PDJ has rightly refused to accept the claim about the family arrangement at this stage.

Considering the close relationship of the parties and the findings of fact recorded by the learned District Judge and the observations that temporary injunction cannot be granted against the co-owner, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.

The petition is dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE RRaut..