(1) (910) AO 437/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Amk APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 437 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 621 OF 2011 Surendra Bhagchand Patel .. Appellant Vs. Gautam Chandru Badlani & Ors. .. Respondents Ms. Pallavi N. Dabholkar for the Appellant. Mr. Rajesh N. Kachare for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM : MRS. ROSHAN DALVI, J. Date : 17 th August, 2011. P.C. 1. The Appellant was the Plaintiff in the original Suit and applied for protection against the obstruction and disturbance of his possession to the entire Suit land claimed by the Appellant. The land claimed by the Appellant is 39 Are. It is the case of the Appellant himself that this land has been purchased in various parts since August, 1989. One portion was purchased by the Appellant, one portion of one Sham Wagh was sold to the Appellant and one remained with the predecessor-in-title of Respondent Nos.1 to 3. 2. The Appellant claims to be in exclusive possession of the land and claims to have put up certain constructions thereon. He has relied on (2) (910) AO 437/11 certain photographs and electricity bills. The electricity bills are actually the initial bills for application of electricity connection. The Appellant has applied for charges for meter equipments, testing etc. The initial bill is of January, 2005. The construction put up is not shown to be on the entire land. 3. The Respondents claim only 1/3rd of the land. The exclusive possession of the Appellant on that portion is not shown. The learned Judge has rightly observed that the documents being the photographs and electricity connection do not show the possession of the whole land. Consequently the refusal of injunction cannot be faulted. The Appeal is dismissed. 4. The Civil Application is disposed of accordingly. (ROSHAN DALVI, J.)