1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.4105 OF 2009 Municipal Council Bhoom through its Chief Officer and others. PETITIONERS. V E R S U S Sarwar Husen Irshad Husen Jahagirdar RESPONDENT Shri K.B. Jadhavar, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J : DATE : 2nd JULY, 2009 PER COURT :­ 1. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 17.01.2009 vide which the Misc. Civil appeal filed by the respondent/plaintiff has been allowed. 2. The respondent plaintiff has filed a RCS No.134/2007 restraining the defendants from causing any illegal obstruction and interference in his possession of hotel premises. An application for temporary injunction was also filed by the plaintiff, same was rejected. Being aggrieved thereby, plaintiff preferred an appeal, same was allowed. 3. Shri Jadhavar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the learned Appellate Court has grossly erred in allowing the appeal. 4. From the perusal of the order, it would reveal that 2 learned appellate court has only restrained the petitioner from obstructing with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit premises till the conclusion of the trial or till the petitioners obtaining the possession of the suit premises from the plaintiff by due procedure of law, which ever occurs earlier. It is settled law that even a tress passer cannot be evicted without following due procedure of law. The learned appellate court has amply protected the right of the present petitioner by observing that if petitioner so desires they can evict the plaintiff by due process of law. 5. In that view of the matter, no perversity or infirmity could be found with the approach adopted by the appellate court so as to warrant interference in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 27 of the Constitution of India. Hence rejected. ( B. R. GAVAI ) JUDGE ..... aaa/wp4105.09