1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.1326 OF 2010 Chokha s/o Limbaji Kamble and ors. Petitioner vs Vithal s/o Limbaji Kamble Respondent ----- Shri B.S.Shinde, Advocate, the petitioner. Coram : Shrihari P.Davare, J. Date : 21th September 2010. P. C. 01. Heard Shri B.S.Shinde, learned counsel for the Petitioners. 02. By the present writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners (original defendants) have prayed that the order dated 25.11.2009 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Parbhani, in M.A.R.J.E. No.110/2009, be quashed and set aside and the Special Civil Suit No.11 of 2009 be transferred from the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli, to any other court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, for deciding the same, in accordance with law. 2 03. The petitioners herein are the original defendants whereas, the Respondent is the original plaintiff who has filed Special Civil Suit No.11 of 2009 on 22.4.2009 in the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli, for specific performance of contract and also for perpetual injunction. The respondent-plaintiff also preferred an application in the suit, praying for injunction restraining the defendants-petitioners herein from alienating the suit land and also from interfering or obstructing peaceful enjoyment of possession of the plaintiff over the suit land. It also appears that exparte status-quo order was passed on 22.4.2009 for the limited period i.e. till appearance of the defendants. Accordingly, the defendants-petitioners herein appeared in the suit on 23.6.2009 and the status-quo order was vacated on the said date on appearance of petitioners- defendants, as per the earlier order. 04. It also appears that the plaintiff- respondent preferred fresh application on 29.6.2009 below Exhibit 37 and prayed for fresh status-quo 3 order, since status-quo earlier granted was vacated. Accordingly, learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli, passed an order on the same day i.e.29.6.2009 as follows; "Both parties are present.Status-quo re- continued till next date." 05. Hence, since the learned Judge passed the order of re-continuation of status-quo without assigning any reasons therefor, the defendants- petitioners herein preferred M.A.R.J.E. No.110 of 2009 before the learned Principal District Judge, Parbhani, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908, for transfer of the said Special Civil Suit No.11 of 2009 from the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli, to any other court for deciding it, in accordance with law, contending that the petitioners - defendants had reasonable belief that they would not get justice from the said Judge. 06. However, learned Principal District Judge, Parbhani, rejected the said M.A.R.J.E. No.110 of 4 2009, by order dated 25.11.2009. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order of rejection, defendants have filed present writ petition, challenging the same and for the prayers mentioned therein. 07. Admittedly, when the order dated 29.6.2009 below Exhibit 37, was passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli, thereby recontinuing the status-quo till next date, both the parties were present before the court and, therefore, it is apparently clear that the said order of re-continuation of status-quo was not passed behind the back of the petitioners herein. 08. It is also not the case of the petitioners-defendants that they were not given any opportunity of hearing on 29.6.2009. Moreover, the learned Principal District Judge, Parbhani, has rightly observed in the impugned order dated 25.11.2009 that, even it is not the case of the petitioners-defendants that there were any changes in respect of status of the suit property between 5 the period 23.6.2009 to 29.6.2009. Besides that, it is also significant to note that, although the petitioners had an opportunity to challenge the order dated 29.6.2009 granting re-continuation of status-quo before the appellate forum, they have, admittedly, not challenged the said order so far, and without resorting to the said remedy, preferred an application i.e. M.A.R.J.E. No.110 of 2009 before the learned Principal District Judge, seeking transfer of Special Civil Suit No. 11 of 2009 from the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli, to some other court, which was rightly rejected by the learned Principal District Judge, Parbhani and, therefore, no interference therein is warranted, under the writ jurisdiction. 19. In the result, present petition being sans merits, stands dismissed summarily. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) pnd/wp1326.10