IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 246 OF 2009 SHRI. MINGUEL D'SOUZA AND 2 ORS., ... Petitioners Versus SMT. JOAQUIM D'SOUZA AND 3 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. A. D. Bhobe,Advocate for the petitioners. Coram:- SMT. R. S. DALVI, J. Date:- 15th April, 2009 P.C. In the civil suit No.121/2006, the plaintiff has obtained an injunction against the defendants from using two small structures and a pathway. The defendant Nos. 1 to 3 have filed this writ petition claiming that they have right in the pathway since 'time immemorial'. They claim that the said two structures are temporary structures and include bathroom and toilet. There is absolutely no documentary evidence with regard to the use of the structures or the pathway by the petitioners. There has been other proceedings against these petitioners by the landlords. Even in those proceedings, the use as claimed by the petitioners, is not shown. Hence, the petitioners' claim that they cannot be injuncted in the impugned order, is not substantiated. The learned Judge has considered the plaintiff's right as an exclusive owner and in possession of the structures of the land admeasuring 236 square metres. It is contended that in the sale deed dated 22.02.2006, these structures are not mentioned. In the sale deed, only the mundkarial house of the plaintiff shown as a purchaser bearing House No.106 standing on the plot, is shown. The plan annexed to the said document, shows the main structure, access road and the main road. That, in fact, shows that the structures in which the right is claimed by the defendants is not even prima facie shown by the petitioners. 2. The respondent No.1 is said to have relied upon the survey record. The record is essentially of the access road, which shows motorable access road from the public road. It appears that, that was because the adjacent holders of the property, are said to have used the said access road from the land of respondent No.1. 3. The petitioners have not shown any legal right to challenge the impugned order. The writ petition is summarily dismissed. SMT. R. S. DALVI, J. SMA