1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4993 of 2010 Shri Vishnu Dhondiba Pawar ... Petitioner versus Shri Shankar Dhondiba Pawar ... Respondent ... Mr. Ajit Kenjale for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 5th July 2010 P.C. 1. The defendant petitioner challenges the order dated 28th April 2010 passed by the Adhoc District Judge – 2 Satara granting injunction against the petitioner. 2. Petitioner and respondent are brothers. The suit property was originally joint family property. Admittedly, partition took place between the two brothers and according to the respondent-plaintiff, suit property was allotted to him while western portion of the total property was allotted to the defendant petitioner. Respondent filed a suit for injunction restraining the petitioner defendant from disturbing his possession. The respondent admitted partition but contended that description of the suit property given by the respondent in the plaint 2 was not correct. Order 8 Rule 4 requires the denials in the written statement to be specific. No evasive denial is permissible. The denial of the petitioner that the suit property was not allotted to the respondent is evasive denial. He admitted that part of the suit property was given to the defendant but did not give what according to him, was the description of the property allotted to the respondent plaintiff. Consequently, lower appellate court has recorded a finding of fact that respondent no.1 prima facie proved his possession over the suit property. In the circumstances, no interference is called for in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is rejected summarily. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)