1 Wp no.6490/09 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.6490 of 2009 Rajendra Ganpat Jagtap ... Petitioner versus Majinder Kaur Gill ... Respondent ... Mr. C.G.Gavnekar for the petitioner. Mr.Asmit Hiwane i/b H.S.Venegavkar for the respondent CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 14th July 2010 P.C. 1. This petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 4 April 2009 passed by the Adhoc Addl. District Judge, Pune confirming the order of injunction passed by the Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Pimpri. 2. Respondent filed a suit for restraining the defendant from disturbing his possession from the suit property. The trial court as well as the lower appellate court have held that respondent is an owner possessor of the property and granted an injunction. The prima facie finding of the two courts below that the respondent was in possession is a possible view requiring no interference in exercise of extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2 Wp no.6490/09 2. Mr.Gavnekar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the description of the property as mentioned in the sale deed under which the respondent purchased the property is different from the suit property inasmuch as Pot Hissa number of the property mentioned in the sale deed is different than the Pot Hissa number of the suit property. The two courts below have referred to the number of the property as well as its boundaries given in the sale deed. In case of any ambiguity in the description, boundaries of the property are held to be more reliable. This is again a possible view taken at the interlocutory stage requiring no interference. Writ Petition is rejected summarily. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)