1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6164 OF 2008 Surendra R. Rajpurkar Petitioner versus Smt.Sitabai R. Amburle and others Respondents Yatin R. Shah for petitioner. Amol P. Mhatre for respondents. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 21st July 2009 PC :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is the original defendant in a suit filed by the respondents. On an application for temporary injunction at Exhibit-5, the Trial Court directed both the parties to maintain status-quo as regards the suit property till the disposal of the suit. The said order has been confirmed in an appeal. 2. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Trial Court recorded a specific finding that the original plaintiffs have not established a prima facie case. He pointed out that even the Appellate Court has merely observed that there is a prima facie case as there is a discrepancy in the measurements. He submitted that with these findings an injunction could not have been granted. 3. After having considered the material on record the Trial Court protected both the parties by directing them to maintain the status-quo. The said order was passed on 9th March 2007 which is still operating 2 today. In view of the concurrent orders passed by the Courts below, at this stage, no interference is called for with the equitable order passed by the Trial Court. It is obvious that the findings recorded by the Courts below are tentative findings and the suit will be decided on its own merits. 4. Subject to what is observed above, the petition is rejected. The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible and preferably before the end of March 2010. (A.S.OKA, J.)