(1) WP. 1108.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1108 OF 2010 Sundar S/o Bhimrao Awhad .. Petitioner VERSUS Dattatraya Laxmanrao Jagtap and ors .. Respondents Mr. P.F. Patni, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. S.G. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for the respondent nos. 1 to 3 ... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 9TH AUGUST, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this Petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order rendered by the executing Court and the appellate Court. The petitioner was injuncted from carrying out any construction in the midway so as to obstruct the plaintiffs' right of access from their house and the Chief Officer of the Municipal Council was restrained from granting any construction permission so as to obstruct the midway. The injunction decree was allegedly breached by the (2) WP. 1108.2010 petitioner and, therefore, the decree holder filed darkhast seeking detention of the petitioner in the civil prison and removal of the middle obstruction caused by erecting a wall of stones (poul). The learned Civil Judge found that the petitioner had erected the obstruction which was not removed. Consequently by order dated 28.4.2009 rendered in the darkhast proceedings, the petitioner was directed to be detained in civil prison for 21 days and further direction was issued to get removed the wall of stones. The petitioner preferred an appeal (RCA no. 50 of 2009) which came to be dismissed. The petitioner filed a pursis exhibit 25 before the Executing Court alleging that he had removed the poul. He made a categorical statement that the obstruction was removed but it was found to be untrue. 3. In this Court also, the petitioner asserted that the said obstruction was removed and there existed no poul (stone's wall) in the midway and as such he was not liable for the punishment for (3) WP. 1108.2010 infringement of the injunction decree. This Court directed the Sanitary Inspector to visit the spot and submit his report. Report of the Sanitary Inspector dated 20.7.2010 reveals that statements made by the petitioner are untrue. It is explicit that the petitioner has no compunction to make such a statement in this Court and as such his obstinate nature is quite conspicuous. Since the statement made by the petitioner is found to be untrue, the Petition is dismissed without consideration of any other issue in view of "Dalip Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others" (2010) 2 S.C.C. 114. Sd/- [V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp