1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 1507/2011 (Motiram D. Bodalkar VERSUS Purushottam D. Bodalkar) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri S.J. Khandalkar, counsel for the petitioner. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : MARCH 28 , 2011 . Heard. The first appellate Court did not commit any error in reversing the order passed by the trial Court granting injunction in favour of the petitioner and directing the defendant-respondent to remove the construction on the suit land. The first appellate Court rightly held that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the trial Court could not have granted a temporary mandatory injunction in favour of the petitioner. The Court held that the issues in controversy between the parties could have been decided after recording of the evidence of both the sides and since the construction was completed, it could not have been demolished at the interim stage on an application filed by the petitioner. While recording the aforesaid finding, the first appellate Court considered the documents on record and while allowing the appeal filed by the respondent, directed the parties to maintain status quo till the decision of the suit. The findings recorded by the first appellate Court are just and proper and call for no interference in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. 2 For the reasons aforesaid, the petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. However, the trial Court is directed to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible as the petitioner is claiming right of way through the land over which the construction is made by the respondent. JUDGE APTE