1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1487 OF 2011 *** 1. Heard Advocate Shri Kishor Doke for Petitioner and Shri Mahajan for Respondent No.1. 2. Trial Court decreed the suit vide judgment dated 4th February, 2009 and restrained present petitioner from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff. The said decree is questioned by present petitioner by filing Regular Civil Appeal No.92 of 2010. In that appeal he sought stay of execution of that judgment and decree. The Appellate Court has rejected that prayer. That rejection is questioned in present writ petition. 3. According to Mr. Doke, the suit as filed was not maintainable because it was hit by provisions of section 47 read with Order XXI 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure. He further contends that purchase by plaintiff Vishnu (Present Respondent) is a lis pendence transfer and therefore could not have been given much importance. According to him, possession is recovered by petitioner in execution of decree obtained by him in Regular Civil Suit No.173 of 1991 on 21st June, 2004. 4. Shri Mahajan is supporting the order. He contends that the trial Court has found Respondent/ plaintiff entitled to injunction and suit has been decreed finally after appreciation of material on record. Appellate Court refused to grant stay. 5. Prima facie consideration reveals that though the present petitioner claims to have recovered possession on 21st June, 2004, he got possession of land admeasuring 2 Hectare 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. 2 Ares in Gat No.77 and 1 Hectare in Gat No. 116. The perusal of judgment of trial Court also shows that when Regular Civil Suit No. 132 of 1993 was decreed, at that time one Amarnath Shahaji Chaudhari was in possession of suit property and in that suit injunction was granted against present petitioner and possession of Amarnath was protected. The said Amarnath then sold suit property to original plaintiff i.e. present Respondent. 6. In view of the findings recorded by trial Court it is apparent that at this stage the consideration by Appellate Court cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse. 7. No case is made out warranting any interference. However, proceedings in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal are expedited. Petitioner is permitted to supply private paper book within a period of three months 4 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. from today. If such private paper book is supplied, the Appellate Court shall attempt to decide the appeal within further period of nine months. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. No costs. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:08/03/2011. ans/1487