7. wp 1654­11.doc rma IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION . WRIT PETITION NO 1654 OF 2011 Dinkar Buva Jadhav .. Petitioner Vs Sandeep Uttam Gujar & Ors .. Respondents . Mr Vinod Jadhav for the Petitioner : CORAM . . , . B R GAVAI J : , . DATE 24th FEBRUARY 2011 . .: P C . 1 , By way of present petition the petitioner challenges the order passed by the learned Appellate Court dated 21st January 2011 thereby rejecting the appeal filed by the present petitioner challenging the order dated 16th July 2010 passed by the , learned Civil Judge Senior Division Satara vide which the learned trial Judge has rejected the application below Exhibit 5 filed by the present petitioner for temporary injunction against . defendant nos 1 and 2 from interfering with his possession and allowed the application below Exhibit 40 restraining defendant . nos 1 and 2 from making alienation of the suit property during . pendnecy of the suit 1 7. wp 1654­11.doc . 2 Both the Courts on appreciation of the material placed before , . it have come to prima facie conclusion that defendant nos 1 , and 2 are in possession of the suit property therefore balance of convenience and irreparable loss are not in favour of the . plaintiff . 3 The scope of interference in the extra ordinary jurisdiction . under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is limited Unless it is found that the view taken by the courts below is either , perverse or impossible it is not permissible for this Court to . interfere with the same No perversity is noticed in the approach adopted by the Courts below to warrant . interference . 4 , However taking into consideration the nature of the dispute the learned trial Court is directed to expedite hearing of the suit , and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible and in . any case within a period of one year from today . 5 . The petition is disposed of with aforesaid direction . . , . [ B R GAVAI J ] 2 7. wp 1654­11.doc 3