IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4523/2010 [RAMAKANT AGRAWAL ..VS.. SMT. UMADEVI AGRAWAL & ANOR] AND WRIT PETITION NO.4518/2010 [LADHARAM HASIJA ..VS.. SMT. UMADEVI AGRAWAL & ORS] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : JANUARY 24, 2011. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The first appellate court has reversed the findings recorded by the trial court on the application filed by the respondents for grant of temporary injunction. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that one of the courts has held that the plaintiffs were in possession of the properties while the other court held that the defendants were in possession of the property. It appears on hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the orders passed by both the courts, that the first appellate court has not considered the Commissioner’s report and certain other evidence which it ought to have considered before reversing the finding of the trial court. However, since the suit is at the stage of evidence, it would not be in the interest of justice to remand the matter to the first appellate court for deciding the appeal afresh on merit. Hence in the facts and circumstances, and in the interest of justice, it is necessary that the parties shall maintain status-quo in the matter till the decision of the suit. The learned counsel for the parties have on instructions from the parties made a statement that they are ready to maintain status-quo in case this court directs the trial court to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible. Hence, in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the parties to maintain status-quo during the pendency of the suit and the trial court is directed to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible and positively within a period of 1 ½ year from the date of this order. Writ petition is disposed with no order as to costs. JUDGE SMP