FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WP/2746/2011 RAOSAHEB VS ROOPCHAND ... 1. Heard Shri Garud, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Gaware, learned Advocate for respondents 1 and 2. 2. The trial Court has rejected prayer of the petitioner under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC. The contention is that the dispute between the parties is not only about possession of property but also about its location and particularly about placement of East-West bandh. Shri Garud, learned Advocate contends that the petitioner is in possession pursuant to the Gift deed executed in his favour. 3. Shri Gaware, learned Advocate for respondents 1 and 2 supports the impugned order. 4. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that the trial has progressed further. Respondents / plaintiffs have closed their evidence and thereafter, defendant No.1 also examined some witnesses and at the time of filing the closure purshis has elected to file an application at Exhibit 97 under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC. 5. It is apparent that the suit filed is only for perpetual injunction. 6. The trial Court has looked into all relevant aspects and found that effort was to fill in the gaps which occurred while leading the evidence. In other words, it found that effort was to collect the evidence. It also noted that the matter was at the concluding stage. 7. As I see no jurisdictional error or perversity in the impugned order, with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order after the suit is finally decided, if occasion arises, present Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Dt.29.4.2011 (B.P.DHARMADHIKARI,J.) akl