1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7413/2007 Date of order : 25.9.2007. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri S.D. Sharma for the petitioners. *** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 1.6.2007 whereby his appeal against the order passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (SD) No.3 has been rejected by the appellate court. Claim of the petitioner in the trial court was that he was permited by the defendant by way of license to make use of the disputed land and that he had constructed garage etc over the disputed land. Learned trial court did not find any prima facie case in favour of the petitioner in so far as his possession is concerned, however, partially granted injunction to the effect that the defendants may not raise any construction. The appellate court maintained the said 2 order. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the appellate court failed to appreciate that the license was oral and on that basis the petitoiner was making use of the disputed property. It was argued that when the trial court and the appellate court found prima facie case in favour of the petitioner, there was no reason not to grant injunction with regard to possession. Having perused the impugned order, I find that while before the trial court, the petitioner could not produce any evidence. The trial court observed that though the petitioner has asserted that there was only verbal licnese but he has not filed any affidavit of the neighbours. For the first time, certain affidavits were filed before the appellate court. The first appellate court has found that defendants were in possession of the disputed land and also that certain consutrction had been raised by them. Having carefully perused the 3 impugned orders, I do not find any infirmity in any of them so as to warrant interference by this Court. The writ petition is, therefore, summarily dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. Skant/-