1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 3083/2009. ( Prabhakar M. Bawankar . -: versus :- Ashok B,. Bawankar and others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 24, 2009. Matter is for final disposal at the stage of admission. I have heard Shri A.S. Manohar, learned counsel for petitioner/defendant, Shri G.G. Modak, learned Counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2/original plaintiffs, Shri A.P. Chaware, learned Counsel for respondent nos. 3 and 4 and learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 5 and 6. Grievance of Shri Modak, learned counsel is that way already existed by North-South boundary of survey no. 173 separating it from field survey no.172 and after death of Mahadeo, there was partition between his legal heirs. Respondent no.1 Ashok started obstructing the petitioner in use of that way and hence in Section 143 proceedings of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, the Tahsildar allowed petitioner to use that way. Said order was challenged before Civil Court by respondent nos. 1 and 2, and they sought temporary injunction, which came to be rejected. Thereafter, they approached the learned District Judge, Wardha in Misc. Civil Appeal No.58/2007 and vide impugned judgment dated 24.04.2009, the relief of temporary injunction came to be granted. 2 Contention is, learned District Judge overlooked the fact that there is no alternate way and entire eastern North-South boundary of field survey no.172 is a canal. It is pointed out that said canal thereafter, turns parallel to southern boundary of field of petitioner. The learned counsel contends that there is obvious error in appreciation of facts. It is also settled that owner of field survey no.173 is with the petitioner in the matter. Shri Modak, learned counsel on the other hand states that the Tahsildar was approached under Section 143 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, and hence the facts pleaded and noticed by this Court above show the error in granting relief under section 143 of M.L.R. Code. He further states that the way by eastern side of field survey no.173 is available and petitioner is using it. After hearing the respective counsel, I find that the learned Additional District Judge has appreciated the controversy and has granted the relief. There is no error apparent or perversity or error of the jurisdiction in the matter. However, considering the fact that application was moved under section 143 of the M.L.R. Code, trial of suit is expedited and Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wardha before whom Regular Civil Appeal No.65/2007 is pending, is directed to decide the same as early as possible and in any case by 30.06.2010. Writ Petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule accordingly. No costs. JUDGE Rgd.