{1} ca28211.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.282 OF 2011 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.304 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1980 OF 1998 Imamsaheb s/o Ismailsaheb, since deceased through his L.Rs & others Applicants Versus Gaurishankar s/o Mohanlal Vyas and others Respondents Mr. R.S.Deshmukh, advocate for the applicants. Mr.Pradeep Deshmukh, advocate holding for Mr.D.K.Kulkarni, advocate for Respondent No.1 – original petitioner. Mrs.Meera T. Biradar, advocate holding for Mr.U.R.Kulkarni, advocate for Respondents No. 2A1 to 7. Mr.H.M.Karwa, advocate for Respondent No.8. Mr.P.P.More, A.G.P. For Respondents No.9 to 11. Mr.V.D.Gunale, advocate for Respondents No. 12-A(i) to 12A(iv), 13, 15 & 16. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE AND R.M.BORDE, JJ. DATE : 24 th January, 2011 PER COURT: 1 Heard Mr.R.S.Deshmukh, learned Counsel for applicants, Mr.Pradeep Deshmukh, learned Counsel holding for Mr.D.K.Kulkarni, advocate for Respondent No.1, Mrs.Meera T. {2} ca28211.odt Biradar, learned Counsel holding for Mr.U.R.Kulkarni, advocate for Respondents No. 2A1 to 7, Mr.H.M.Karwa, learned Counsel for Respondent No.8, Mr.P.P.More, learned A.G.P. For Respondents No. 9 to 11 and Mr.V.D.Gunale, learned Counsel for Respondents No. 12-A(i) to 12A(iv), 13, 15 & 16. 2 The applicants, who are original tenants, have filed this Civil Application seeking modification of the interim order / stay granted by this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.304 of 2010 vide order dated 07.12.2010. The appellant had filed writ petition challenging the orders of tenancy authorities whereby the application of the heirs of respondent no.1, for restoration of possession of the suit lands, was allowed. The applicants were respondent nos1(i)(1) to 1(i)(8) in the writ petition. The appellant claims that he had purchased 3 acres 24 gunthas land out of the suit lands being S. Nos.248 and 243, situate at Latur. In view thereof, the applicants have prayed that the interim order, passed by this Court on 07.12.2010, be confined only to the land claimed to have been purchased and in possession of the appellant only. 3 These proceedings are arising from an application under Section 46 of the Hyderabad Tenancy Act filed by applicant- Respondent Nos.1(i)1 to 1(i)(8). Their application for restoration was rejected by the Additional Tahsildar, Latur vide order dated 28.10.1988. This order was carried by them in appeal before the {3} ca28211.odt Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Latur. The appeal was allowed vide order dated 22.01.1992 and land S.Nos.243 and 248 admeasuring 11 acres 20 gunthas and 12 acres 20 gunthas, respectively, were directed to be restored to the applicants- respondent Nos.1(i)1 to 1(i)(8). This order of the Deputy Collector (22.01.1992) was carried in Revision by Respondent No.5 and the appellant before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the Revision Application vide judgment and order dated 02.03.1998. The order of Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal was challenged in writ petition by the appellant alone. The writ petition was also dismissed. The Letters Patent Appeal is also filed by the appellant alone. While admitting the Letters Patent Appeal on 07.12.2010, this Court confirmed the interim order, passed during pendency of the appeal, however, granted liberty to the respondents, namely present applicants to apply for modification of the interim order. Hence the applicants have filed this application. 4 Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant challenged the order passed by the learned Single Judge in writ petition confirming the orders passed by the Revenue authorities only in respect of the land, which the appellant claims to have purchased i.e. the land admeasuring 3 acres 24 gunthas out of S.No.243. Learned Counsel for the appellant, therefore, on instructions from his client who is present in the Court, submits that he has no objection for modifying the order so as to confine it {4} ca28211.odt to the land purchased and in possession of the appellant (3 acres 24 gunthas out of S.No.243). 5 Hence, we pass the following order: The interim order passed and confirmed by this Court vide order dated 07.12.2010, stands modified to the following effect: The interim injunction shall confine to the land admeasuring 3 acres 24 gunthas out of S.No.243, situate at Latur, which the appellant claims that he has purchased and is in possession thereof. In other words, the order of injunction dated 07.12.2010, except the aforesaid land (3 acres 24 gunthas), stands vacated. 6 With this modification, the Civil Application is disposed of. All contentions of the parties on merits, to be considered at the stage of final hearing of the Letters Patent Appeal. R.M.BORDE D.B.BHOSALE JUDGE JUDGE adb/ca28211