1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 4578 of 2011 Babarao Pandurang Patil and another. Vs. Sou. Kalawati RambhaujiSathawane. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. D.L. Dharmadhikari, counsel for the petitioners. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK J. DATE : 7 th December, 2011. Both the courts have concurrently held that the respondent-plaintiff had a prima facie case and the balance of convenience was also in favour of the plaintiff. The courts observed that the petitioners-defendants would not suffer any grave or irreparable injury in case the injunction was granted in favour of the plaintiff. Since the plaintiff had challenged the Will making a bequest of the suit property in favour of the petitioners and had made out a prima facie case, the courts rightly held that the petitioners should be restrained from alienating the suit property from creating any third party interest therein. There is no error, much less a jurisdictional error, in the impugned order. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, with no orders to costs. JUDGE Hirekhan.