1 AO NOS. 130/2010 & 131/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 130 OF 2010 ,With CA/13181/2010 ,In AO/130/2010, With AO/131/2010 ,With CA/13182/2010 ,In AO/131/2010 SHAIKH ABDUL RAZZAK SHAIKH AHMED AND ORS VERSUS M/S SUMER INDUSTRIES JALNA AND ANR ... Advocate for appellants :Mr. Kute Rajendra L. Advocate for the respondent :Mr.Hemant Surve ... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. Dated: December 12, 2011 ... PER COURT :- 1. Heard finally. 2. Grant of injunction below Exh.5 in Special Civil Suit No.175/2009 and RCS No. 336/2009 by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalna, dated 13.9.2010, is questioned by original defendants. 3. The record illustrate, the suit property was originally owned by Shaikh Ahmed Shaikh Amer, father of appellant and husband of Smt.Maheboobbi. The agricultural property survey No.408/2, to the extent of 3 acres 24 gunthas ( approximately 11,500 sq.mts.) is in question. 2 AO NOS. 130/2010 & 131/2010 4. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that in RCS No.381/2002 by one of the brother of the appellant, wherein appellant was original defendant No.2 and Smt.Maheboobbi was original defendant no.4, Smt.Maheboobbi has un- equivocally stated having two Anas share which, by calculation, goes to 29 Gunthas. Said suit has been decreed on 28.3.2007, against which appeal is pending. Learned Counsel submits that, by virtue of the said suit, the rights of Smt.Maheboobbi could not exceed, even otherwise, than 29 gunthas. Learned Counsel submits that preparation of the City Survey record in the name of Smt.Maheboobbi, by itself, is false, as has been stated by the Deputy Superintendent of Land Record Rameshwar Waghmode in Writ Petition No. 1872/2011. Learned Counsel submits, the P.R. Card could not have been so issued by the competent authorities incorporating CTS No.9669- A which, indeed refers to Government property. 5. Before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, a document of partition was relied upon by Smt.Maheboobbi, staking claim in respect of the suit property, being received by her as her share. The learned Judge has also recorded mutation entries in the City Survey record in respect of the said area, which comprised approximately 11,500 sq.mts. Reference to reply affidavit of Rameshwar in Writ Petition No. 3 AO NOS. 130/2010 & 131/2010 1872/2011 at this stage will not be of any avail to the appellants, as the plaintiffs in earlier suit (M/s Sumer Industries), was not made party in the said writ and, probably, with calculation and deliberation. Consequently, any reference made by said Rameshwar, who is unconcerned, will not dilute, diffuse and deflate the rights flowing, prima facie, in favour of M/s Sumer Industries, purchaser of the property by virtue of the sale deed dt.12.2.2009. During the course of submissions, I have inquired with Mr.Kute, learned Counsel, whether CTS record No. 9669-A is altered or is challenged before any competent forum under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. Apt answer is, there is nothing to this effect. This informs, the CTS entries in the name of predecessor-in-title remained intact as on today, and so also, on the date of clamp of injunction. Even if sale deed executed by Smt.Maheboobbi could be branded to be beyond entitlement of her share, however, there is nothing to demonstrate that, prima facie, reliance placed to the partition deed, in itself, is illusory. 6. The contention and assertions raised by the appellant about HIBA, again, does not surface anywhere in the proceedings by virtue of original document, or its photostat copy, which was 4 AO NOS. 130/2010 & 131/2010 imperative for the appellant, to be produced in his suit, where he seeks cancellation of sale deed dt.12.2.2009. 7. Re-visiting the facts, I find, there is no error on the part of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, in clamping injunction against the appellants. Both the Appeals From Order are dismissed. The observations are prima facie. to be confined to present Appeals from order. Earlier order of status quo is vacated. The prayer sought to renew status quo is rejected. Both the Civil Applications disposed of. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. ) ... agp/130-131-10ao