:1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 3667 OF 2009 PETITION NO. 3667 OF 2009 PETITION NO. 3667 OF 2009 Dadaso Baburao Deshmukh. ... Petitioner. V/s. Ravji Vyankatrao Deshmukh & Anr. ... Respondents. Mr. N.S. Patil for the Petitioner. None for the Respondents. ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. 17TH 17TH 17TH APRIL 2009. APRIL 2009. APRIL 2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . Heard learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner. Perused the interlocutory orders under challenge. 2. Prima facie, the Court below has found that the Petitioner has not been able to point out his possession of the entire Gat No.1023 and therefore, refused injunction. The Lower Appellate Court thereafter made an equitable order and protected the rights of parties during the pendency of the Suit. The crop has been admittedly forwarded to the sugar factory. Even the amount is to be brought in Court and thereafter, the Defendant - Respondent will have to furnish security as directed by the Lower Appellate Court. These are tentative and prima facie findings and they do not prejudice the case of the parties on merits at the trial. Therefore and when the order under challenge does not suffer from any error apparent nor any perversity is disclosed, there is no reason to interfere with the same. The Petition is dismissed. (S.C. (S.C. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.)