-1- FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 3849/2008. ( Vijay Nilkant Awari .vrs. Vinod Rajanna Narendulwar ) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or Directions Court's or Judge's Orders. And Registrar's Orders. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : OCTOBER 15, 2008. Heard Advanced Shri Aurangabadkar, for petitioner / original defendant no.6. He seeks leave to amend prayer clause to incorporate challenge to the order passed by the trial court below Exh.5. Advocate Shri De, as also learned A.G.P. has no objection to consider the Writ Petition as if that challenge exists. With this understanding the matter has been heard. The Courts below have found that though the petitioner [an ex-serviceman] claims to be in possession of area allotted to him by the respondent nos. 3 to 5, he was not in position to give precise boundaries thereof. The -2- material on record produced by the parties has been considered and on that basis, after noticing the boundaries, the temporary injunction has been given to the plaintiff nos. 1 and 2 i.e. the present respondent nos. 1 and 2. Even the possession receipt relied upon by the present petitioner does not show boundaries of the area of which he is handed over possession. In view of this material on record, I do not find any perversity in the approach of the Court below. However, considering the fact that the respondent nos. 3 to 6 allegedly placed the petitioner in possession of certain land and while executing possession receipt did not mention the boundaries in it, and also that the petitioner is ex-serviceman who has been allotted the land in that capacity, I find it expedient to direct the Civil Judge Senior Division, Chandrapur to expeditiously decide the Civil Suit no.146/2008. Advocate Shri De, states that the suit can be conveniently decided within six months. However, as the suit is of the year 2008, and government as also its officers [as alleged by the petitioner] are parties, I direct that the Court should decide the Civil Suit as early as possible and within a period of one year from the date of -3- communication of this order to it. It is made clear, that during the pendency of the suit the plaintiff shall not create any third party interest over the suit property and shall not in any way create any encumbrance over it, to the prejudice of the present petitioner. With these directions the Writ Petition is disposed of. No cost. JUDGE Rgd.