1 WP No.10230/09 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10230 of 2009 Sarojini Tannaji Shitole and ors. ... Petitioners versus Shivaji Dhondiba Kamthe and others ... Respondents ... Mr.A.A.Kumbhakoni, Sr.Counsel i/b A.M.Kulkarni for the petitioners CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 1st August 2011 P.C. 1. Heard. 2. Petitioners claim to be the owners and landlords of the property. Respondent nos.1 to 4 are the tenants. They had filed a suit against the petitioners for a declaration and injunction. In the suit, they claimed injunction restraining the petitioners from disturbing their possession. The injunction was granted by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court. 2. The two courts below have concurrently held that the respondent nos.1 to 4 are in possession of the property. The finding is a possible finding of fact requiring no interference in exercise of 2 WP No.10230/09 extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. Mr.Kumbhakoni, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submitted that petitioners had given a power of attorney to one Mr.Vilas Nandkude and the petition has been filed by Mr.Nandkude as a power of attorney holder of the petitioners. He submits that petitioners have purported to revoke the power of attorney granted to Mr.Nandkude. However, that would not affect the present writ petition because neither the petitioners either by themselves or through their power of attorney holder are entitled to disturb the possession of the respondents. There is no merit in the writ petition which is hereby rejected. (D.G.KARNIK, J)