1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5019 OF 2011. _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|_______________________________________ Mr.V.P.Patil, advocate for the petitioner. CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 12.07.2011. 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner had filed a suit for specific performance which came to be dismissed. The petitioner preferred an appeal in the year 2005. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner moved an application for appointment of TILR to measure the land in possession of the petitioner. The said application is rejected by the trial Court. Aggrieved thereby, the present Writ Petition is filed. 3. Mr.Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court has dismissed the suit 2 of the plaintiff on the ground that only 27 ares land remains and for such a small area the specific performance can not be granted. In fact, the suit filed by the plaintiff for perpetual injunction is decreed. As such the TILR would be a proper person to measure the land in possession of the petitioner which would make the position clear. 4. The suit filed by the present petitioner for specific performance is dismissed. The appeal is filed in the year 2005 and the present application has been filed in June 2011 at the time when the appeal was fixed for final hearing. Moreover, the suit is only for specific performance. In the suit there is no dispute regarding the boundaries or the factum of possession. The petitioner is entitled to prove with other attending circumstances and evidence the exact area in his possession, more particularly, when the petitioner says that even his suit for perpetual injunction is decreed. In light of above, no error is committed by the Court below while rejecting the application. 3 5. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.12.07.2011. asp/office/wp5019.11