1 W.P. 4050/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4050/2011 SURESH SHANTILAL BORA VS. PRADEEP RAMESHWAR CHITLANGE AND OTHERS Mr. Dhananjay P. Deshpande, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.P. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 30th June, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. This writ petition is filed against the judgment and order dated 30/04/2011 passed by Incharge District Judge, Beed in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 20/2011, allowing the respondent No.1’s application for temporary injunction. By this order, the petitioner /defendant No.1 is prevented from carrying on certain construction work. The learned District Judge held that since admittedly the petitioner / defendant No. 1 did not obtain necessary permission from Municipal Council, for the construction work, the injunction as prayed for, should be granted. He further observed that no hardship would be caused to the petitioner atleast till he gets construction permission from the Municipal council. In view of this, the impugned order is quite sound and it can not be set aside. When I was about to dismiss the writ petition, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, requested that I should observe that the impugned order would get terminated if the petitioner gets 2 W.P. 4050/2011 permission for construction. I am afraid, such an order can not be passed as on today. The petitioner may succeed in getting permission and thereupon he is at liberty to make appropriate application to the learned judge of the trial Court for variation in the impugned order. Such liberty, at the most, can be granted. The petition is dismissed. [A.V. NIRGUDE,J.] ts k/2011/June30/wp4050.11