1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.3221 OF 2006. Abhishek Madhukar Kshirsagar and others ... Petitioners. Versus Murlidhar Bayaji Kshirsagar and others ... Respondents. ... Mr.A.M.Nagarkar, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.L.V.Sangit, advocate for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4. Respondent No.1 dead. Respondent No.5 served. ... CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J. Date : 30.06.2009. PER COURT 1. Heard. 2. The petitioners are original plaintiffs who filed suit (RCS No.91/2004) for declaration 2 and injunction as well as partition. The dispute relates to three agricultural lands enumerated in the claim clause. Out of these lands Respondent No.3 Madhukar/defendant No.3 alienated one parcel of land bearing Gat No.552/1 in favour of the Respondent No.5/defendant No.5. The Respondent No.5 filed an application for temporary injunction, whereas petitioners also sought injunction restraining the Respondents from creating third party interest. The alienation was effected prior to filing of the suit and, therefore, the Respondent No.5 asserted that he has stepped into shoes of Respondent No.3 as a purchaser. The injunction application of the petitioners is allowed and the Respondents are restrained from creating third party interest. Simultaneously, the first appellate Court allowed the application of Respondent No.5 and restrained the petitioners from disturbing his possession in respect of one of the suit land purchased by him i.e. Gat No.552/1. 3. Considering the nature of litigation and the fact that the suit is pending since 2004, 3 it would be expedient and in the interest of justice to accelerate the process of the suit proceedings in order to avoid further delay. The nature of the properties as being ancestral or owned by the Respondents, separately, is yet to be determined. The judicial discretion exercised by the first appellate Court seems to be based on material which indicated earlier possession of the Respondent No.3 and transfer of his interest in favour of the Respondent No.5 before filing of the suit. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on consideration of the rival contentions, the petition is disposed of with direction that the main suit (RCS No.91/2004) shall be expeditiously decided. The parties to appear before the trial Court on 27.7.2009 and thereafter the suit be decided within a period of eight (8) months as far as possible. The parties shall maintain statusquo position till disposal of the suit. It is made clear that no opinon on 4 merits is expressed in this order. The petition disposed of. (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) asp/office/wp322106