1 wp5220.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 5220 of 2010 Mr. Lahu Ramchandra Bagal ... Petitioner v/s. Mr. Ashok alias Balasaheb Janku Bagal & ors. ... Respondents Mr. G.S. Godbole i/b. A.B. Tajane for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak T. Raut for the respondents. CORAM:- B.R. GAVAI, J DATED :- MARCH 21, 2011. P.C. The petition arises out of concurrent findings of fact vide which the learned trial Court has granted an injunction in favour of respondent- plaintiff and the order passed by the Appellate Court thereby dismissing the appeal of the present petitioner. 2. The learned trial Court on the basis of the evidence led before it has found that the respondent-plaintiff has made out a prima-facie case and 2 wp5220.10.sxw further that the tests of balance of convenience and irreparable injury lie in favour of the plaintiff. The said finding of fact has been confirmed by the Appellate Court. The scope of interference under concurrent findings of fact is very limited. Unless it is found that findings are perverse or impossible, it is not permissible for this Court to interfere with the same. No perversity is noticed to warrant interference. 3. Rejected. 4. However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, hearing of the suit is expedited. The learned trial Court is directed to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of one year from today. (B.R. GAVAI, J)