1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR APPEAL AGAINST ORDER NO. 15/2010. Chaturbhuj Mahadevoji Varma and others. -: VERSUS :- Sau. Kalavati Madanlalji Varma and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 06, 2010. Heard Shri P.Y. Deshpande, learned Counsel for appellants and Shri V.M. Deshpande, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 7/original plaintiffs. In Special Civil Suit No. 148/2007, the trial Court has granted temporary injunction thereby restraining the present respondents/applicants therein from obstructing or disturbing the possession of respondents over the property at Sr.No.1 in Schedule-B. In relation to other properties in the said Schedule and total 4 properties in Schedule-A, the appellants are restrained from creating any third party interest. Shri P.Y. Deshpande, learned Counsel has attempted to demonstrate that the cause of action if any, initially accrued in favour of the respondents on 30.09.1986 or then in the alternative on 17.01.1990 ignoring the said causes and dates, cognizance of all 2 grievance made in 2007 has been taken. He points out that the father of appellants had no property or any business. Field Survey No.83/1 belong to grand-father and by Will executed by the said grand-father it devolved upon the appellant no.1 Chaturbhuj. He states that the mutation has been on the basis of the said Will has been taken on 30.09.1986. Thereafter, on 17.01.1990 while resolving a dispute the respondent no.7 executed a registered relinquishment deed and gave up all his shares/entitlement in the family. According to him as all these relevant facts are not looked into, there is failure to exercise jurisdiction. Shri V.M. Deshpande, learned counsel has pointed out that neither the Will of grand-father in favour of appellant no.1 Chaturbhuj nor relinquishment deed dated 17.01.1990, are accepted by the respondents. He states the field survey no. 83/1 admittedly belonged to grand-father and it has thereafter through inheritance come to the heirs of Mahadeoraoji. With the assistance of respective learned Counsel, I have perused the relevant papers. It is apparent that Mahadeoraoji had expired before the death of his father i.e. grand-father of present appellants. The Trial Court has looked into all the relevant aspects. I do not find any jurisdictional error. The respondents have not claimed exclusive possession of property mentioned in Schedule A or then of second property mentioned in Schedule-B. The Trial Court has after properly appreciating the material found that prima facie case has been made out to restrain the appellants 3 from creating any third party interest in relation to these properties. In relation to property at Sr.No.1 in Schedule-B it has found that the property is in possession of respondent no.7. As I do not find any jurisdictional error or perversity and these interim orders are operating since 21.02.2009 and suit is of the year 2007, I am not inclined to interfere in the order, however, the proceedings in Special Civil Suit No. 148/2007 are expedited and the court of 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati is directed to decide the said suit as early as possible and in any case within a period of one year from the date of communication of this order to it. However, it is clarified that till the suit is decided, the present respondents also shall not create any 3rd party interest in the property, including the property at Sr.No.1 in Schedule-B. With these directions and observations, Appeal is disposed of, with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.