1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.190 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13430 OF 2011 Satish s/o Kashinath More .. Appellant Versus Kashinath s/o Daulatrao More and ors. .. Respondents Mr J.D.Maniyar, Advocate holding for Mr R.B.Dhaware, Advocate for appellant Mr R.R.Bangar, Advocate for respondents 1, 3 and 5 Mr M.L.Dharashive, Advocate for respondents 2, 4 and 6 CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 21st December 2011 PER COURT Heard extensively. 2. In Special Civil Suit No.38 of 2011, learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Latur by order dated 16.8.2011 did not yield to grant injunction below Exh.5 and consequently, the Appeal from Order. 3. Perusal of the order of learned Judge, particularly paragraphs 11 and 12 specify the details in the matter. The respondent herein is new purchaser based on the so called partition effected in 2001 and mutation followed thereafter. At this stage the possession of the purchaser need not be disputed nor it should be permitted to be disturbed to the extent of sale transaction of the respondent. Consequently, rejection of Exh.5 by the learned Judge does not call for interference. Appeal from Order rejected. Civil Application disposed of. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. ) (vvr/190.11ao)