1 SB Civil Writ Petition No.9725/2008 Bhagwatilal. vs. Jagdish Chandra & Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9725/2008 Bhagwatilal. vs. Jagdish Chandra and others. Date : 7.1.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.KC Samdaria, for the petitioner. Mr.Ravi Bhansali ) for the respondents. Mr.Sanjay Nahar ) - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has challenged the order of the appellate court dated 7.11.2008 being aggrieved because of the fact that the trial court by interim order dated 31.5.2007 specifically restrained the defendants from interfering in possession of the plaintiff/petitioner over the property in dispute whereas the appellate court merely passed the order that both the parties shall maintain status quo with respect to the property in dispute. 2 SB Civil Writ Petition No.9725/2008 Bhagwatilal. vs. Jagdish Chandra & Ors. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner got the property in dispute by virtue of gift deed which was executed in the year 1981 by the owner of the property Mst. Gattu Bai. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the ancestor of defendants – Satya Narain was in possession of the property before the execution of the gift deed and he continued to remain in possession because of the permission granted by the title holder, therefore, their possession was permissive possession. However, Satya Narain himself constructed his house and thereafter, his son also constructed the house and according to the petitioner, the defendants shifted to their new residence before 1½ months from filing of the suit by the petitioner. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, since the respondents have no right, title or interest in the property and they were in permissive possession upto the period before filing of the suit and by taking benefit of absence of the petitioner, the respondents tried to raise construction, therefore, the trial court specifically granted injunction restraining the respondents from interfering in the possession of 3 SB Civil Writ Petition No.9725/2008 Bhagwatilal. vs. Jagdish Chandra & Ors. the petitioner. The first appellate court interfered in the order passed by the trial court on the basis of some conjectures only which is clear by the observation of the first appellate court that how the respondents who handed over the possession to the petitioner before 1½ months only would take forcible possession from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the documents which have been set up by the respondents are creating no title in their favour and learned counsel for the petitioner also referred the site inspection report prepared by the site inspection commissioner, copy of which has been shown to this Court. I considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order as well as the site inspection report and the reasons given by the two courts below. It will not be appropriate to comment in detail on the facts of the case because of the reason that two courts below have considered all aspects of the matter and decided prima-facie case 4 SB Civil Writ Petition No.9725/2008 Bhagwatilal. vs. Jagdish Chandra & Ors. in favour of the plaintiff and granted interim relief. The relief granted by the trial court has been altered by the appellate court by ordering that both the parties should maintain status quo. I do not find that said finding is based on no evidence or is based only on conjectures. The first appellate court considered the totality of the facts and passed appropriate order and I do not find any reason to interfere while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In view of the above, this writ petition, having no merits, is hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya