1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2448 OF 2008 (Govinda Ati Sadashiv & Ors. vs. Janrao Ati Sadashiv ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DECEMBER 01, 2008. Heard Ms. Udeshi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Kasat, learned learned for the respondent. In a suit for injunction and possession of agricultural field, temporary injunction application moved by present respondent was earlier rejected. Thereafter, he has moved another application under Section 94 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, complaining that defendant (present petitioners) have undertaken construction work in the suit field. The Court below has restrained the petitioners from proceeding further with the construction. Ms. Udeshi, learned counsel for petitioners states that in this background, application at Exh. 5, refusing temporary injunction had become final and as such there was no scope for moving another application. She further states that 2 in the earlier application, similar relief was sought and rejected. Shri Kasat, learned counsel is seeking time to obtain instructions about the subject matter of earlier application as according to him, at the relevant time, there was no question of construction being undertaken by the present petitioners. After hearing parties, I find that the order of temporary injunction is operating against the present petitioners since 8.4.2008. The learned counsel for the respondent has also stated that he has examined one of the witness and the suit is being taken up expeditiously. In the circumstances, the interest of justice can be satisfied by directing 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Achalpur, to decide Regular Civil Suit No. 117 of 2007 itself expeditiously preferably by 31.3.2009. If the present petitioners are allowed to proceed with the construction and ultimately the suit is decreed against the present petitioners, the petitioners will be put to some loss. Hence, I find that the above order is in the interest of parties. Accordingly, the parties are directed to cooperate with the trial Court in expeditious disposal of Civil Suit. The Suit be decided by 31.3.2009. Liberty to the petitioners to approach this 3 Court, if the suit is not so decided. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.