1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORER NO.653 OF 2009 IN S.C. SUIT NO.1568 OF 2008 Smt. Asha Mohanlal Shah. ...Appellant. Vs. Indukumar K. Kotak and anr. ...Respondent. Mr.C.K.Tripathi for the Appellant. Mr. D.R.Singh for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 28th July,2009 PC： 1. This is an appeal filed by the original defendants challenging the order dated 9.2.2009 passed by the City Civil Court by which injunction has been granted preventing the defendants from dispossessing the plaintiffs. The impugned order is passed by the Judge, City Civil Court in Notice of Motion taken out by the plaintiffs which is also 2 for permanent injunction. The suit was filed on 22.8.2008 with the averments that they were in possession. A perusal of the impugned order as well as documents indicate that, on 24.9.2009, police recorded a statement of defendant No.1 in which she admitted that after her husband s death, the suit property was being used by the plaintiffs. The husband of the defendant No.1 expired in the year 2004. Apart from this, it appears that show cause notice U/s. 111 was issued by the Special Executive Magistrate and in this show cause notice, it is mentioned that the present defendant No.1 had made a statement that the suit property was given six years ago to the plaintiff No.1 on rent. These admissions have been relied upon by the trial court. Apart from this, there are several documents which are relied upon by the trial court to hold that the plaintiffs have made out prima facie case. Not a fit case to interfere. Hence, appeal rejected. 3 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.820 OF 2009 1. In view of the above order, civil application does not survive and therefore, the same is also rejected. ( R.S.MOHITE, J.) 4 5 CORAM : D.K.DESHMUKH & R.S.MOHITE, JJ. DATE : 8TH JUNE, 2009 P.C. . Rule, returnable on 8th June, 2009. 2. Stand over to 8th June, 2009. The learned counsel for the state seeks time. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.)