spb/- 1 wp9694-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9694 OF 2010 Shri Baban Namdeo Bhote ... Petitioner. V/s. Shri Shailprabhat Sudhakar Kulkarni & Ors ... Respondents. ----- Mr M.P. Wamorkar i/by Maravoor Wamorkar & Co. for the Petitioner. Mr. Girish B. Badige with N.P.Mule for the Respondent No.1. ----- CORAM : D. G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 04th JULY, 2011. P.C. : 1 This petition is directed against an order passed on an application for injunction. Being interlocutory, the order calls for no interference in exercise of an extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2 Gat No. 170 admeasures 3H.53Ares. Out of this an area of 2H. 24Ares was given to the respondent in partition. Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that there was no partition and the area of 2H.24Ares was not separated from the remaining area of 1H.29Ares and, therefore, the respondents cannot construct any building in the area alleged to be allotted to them. This argument is contrary to the spb/- 2 wp9694-10.sxw averments made in the plaint. In paragraph 2 of the plaint, the petitioner (original plaintiff) has stated that there was a partition and an area of 2H. 24Ares was alloted to the respondent no.2 (original defendant no.2). In paragraph 1 of the plaint, while giving description of the property, he has given boundaries of 1H.29Area, confirming that only 1H.29 Ares land from the said Gat number was allotted to his share. This clearly shows that there was a partition and separate possession. 3 No interference is called for in the impugned order. Petition is rejected summarily. [D.G. KARNIK, J.]