1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9897 OF 2010 Shantaram Kalu Patil and others ...Petitioners Versus Raghunath Kalu Patil ...Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9898 OF 2010 Shantaram Kalu Patil and others ...Petitioners Versus Kamalbai Raghunath Patil ...Respondent ..... Mr. K.C. Sant, advocate for the petitioner ..... CORAM: S. S. SHINDE, J. DATED: 22nd NOVEMBER, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 Heard Mr. Sant, learned counsel for the petitioners in both the petitions. These writ petitions take exception to the order dated 18.8.2010, passed by the Additional District Judge, Dhule. 2 Counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to the order of the trial court and submitted that in para 8, the trial court has discussed that the original plaintiff himself has admitted the possession of the petitioners. therefore, the appellate court should not 2 have taken different view than the view taken by the trial court. According to the counsel for the petitioners, the trial court after taking into consideration the documents submitted on record by the defendants and after taking into consideration the admission of the plaintiff, prima facie found that the plaintiff had not made out the case for temporary injunction. However, the appellate court ignoring the findings recorded by the trial court, has allowed the appeal filed by the respondents. Therefore, counsel would submit that the matter requires consideration. 3 After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and after perusal of para 11 of the judgment of appellate court, it is abundantly clear that the original plaintiffs, who was appellants before the appellate court had produced on record 7x12 extract of the suit land, which was for the year 1996-97 to 2008-2009, prima facie proved their exclusive possession over the suit land. Therefore, the appellate court has rightly exercised its discretion in favour of the original plaintiff. The appellate court being final court of facts findings and therefore, no interference is warranted in the extra ordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Writ petitions devoid of any merit and the same stand dismissed summarily. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) rlj/ 3