1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.593 OF 2008 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.223 OF 2008 Smt.Anusaya Shankar Gadhave ..Applicant alias Deshmukh V/s. Sambhaji Bandu Kanase & ors ..Respondents Mr.P.B.Shah, Advocate, for the applicant Mr.Amit Borkar with Mr.Shrikant Yadav, Advocate, for the respondents CORAM : C. L. PANGARKAR, J. DATE : 3RD FEBRUARY, 2010 P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This application has been filed for grant of an injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the possession of the applicant over the suit land. 2 3. The appeal has been admitted by this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that although, a Decree of injunction has been passed by the Appellate Court, the Judgment of the First Appellate Court does not show that the question with regard to possession has been considered by the First Appellate Court. After having gone through the Judgment of the First Appellate Court, it is apparent that the learned Judge has not considered as to whether the plaintiff or defendant was in possession of the Suit property. On the other hand, the learned Trial Court has found that the defendant had acquired title under Section 32(g) and thereafter, under the Consolidation Scheme a Certificate has been issued in favour of the defendant. The Scheme comes into effect only when possession is delivered. In view of this, it must be assumed that the defendant is 3 in possession of the Suit land and as such, the injunction must follow against the plaintiff. In view of the above facts the defendant is found to be in possession of the Suit property prima facie. In view of this, the above Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). (C.L.PANGARKAR, J.)