SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.452 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1086 OF 2010 Dadaso M. Mane ...Appellant. v. Kashinath A. Bellenavar & Anr. ...Respondents. Mr. Satyajeet Mirajkar i/by Priyal G. Sarda ,advs. For the Appellant. Mr. Manoj A. Patil, adv. For the Respondent No.1. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : JULY 15, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, who is original defendant. As the sale deed in his favour has been set aside by the trial Court, he had preferred regular civil appeal in District Court and also moved an application for temporary injunction restraining the plaintiff/respondent no.1 from causing any interference in his possession. The appellate Court rejected that application. The order passed by the Appellate Court indicates that the present appellant had showed only one photograph indicating that certain children were playing on the ground that itself could not be the evidence of possession of the suit property. Plaintiff has not produced even copy of the sale deed in his favour. Mortgage deed by conditional sale in favour of the plaintiff shows that the plaintiff was in possession of the property. In view of this, I am - 2 - unable to see any mistake in the impugned order passed by the District Court. 2 Therefore, the appeal and the application stand dismissed. However, taking into consideration the nature of the documents, district Court shall expedite the hearing and dispose off the Regular Civil Appeal No.227 of 2009 as early as possible and in any case within six months. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)