ssm sm sm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.8310 OF 2008 PETITION NO.8310 OF 2008 PETITION NO.8310 OF 2008 Nivrutti Appa Bailbhinge (Fule) ...Petitioner Vs. Bhagwant Gangadhar Deshpande (since died, through his L.Rs.) ...Respondents. Mr.Machindra Patil for the Petitioner. Mr.Ajay A.Joshi for Respondent No.1-A. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. DATED DATED DATED : 19th December, 2008. : 19th December, 2008. : 19th December, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. The Petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 11/12/2008 whereby the application is moved to restrain the otherside from even putting execution arising out of an order under Section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, which admittedly has been confirmed right upto the High Court. Whatever the right flows to the parties from such confirmed order, just cannot be restrained or/injuncted at the instance of the parties like the Petitioner in whose favour, in fact there is already order of injunction in Regular Civil Suit No.254 of 1998, whereby the Court has protected his possession over the suit land. ( 2 ) 2. Therefore, once there is a protection, there is no question of filing such application for injunction restraining him from moving execution application, pursuance to the confirmed order. No party can be restrained from taking action in accordance with law. Such application as filed is impermissible. The Application is rightly rejected by the Court below. The Petition is dismissed accordingly. No costs. 3. The Petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate proceedings available in accordance with law. ( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)