KBP 4928-09.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4928 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLCATION NO.1246 OF 2009 Smt.Meera Vasant Bhandare ..Petitioner Vs. Smt.Ujwala Shriram Bhabal and ors. ..Respondents ......... Mr.P.G.Karande i/b.Mr.A.J.Waity, for petitioner. Mr.G.M.Joshi, for respondent nos.1A to 1D. ......... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 18 th August, 2009. P.C. : 1] Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and respondents. 2] On 23 rd July, 2007, in an appeal under Rule 1 of Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the learned District Judge granted injunction restraining the respondents from obstructing the petitioner from using the way passing from the eastern portion of the land towards plaintiff’s land, until disposal of the suit. The petitioner is the original plaintiff. An application was made by the petitioner invoking Rule 2­A of Order XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the “said Code”). The said application is pending. The allegations in the said application is that the respondents have committed breach of order of temporary injunction. Pending the said application under Rule 2­A of the order XXXIX of the said Code, an application was made by the petitioner before the learned District Judge praying for following relief: KBP 4928-09.sxw 2 “a) The Senior Inspector of the Police Station of Khed be directed to provide the assistance/aid to implement the injunction order of this Hon’ble Court by removing all the obstacles placed by the deceased Opponent No.1 and by his above representatives by permitting me to reconstruct the ramp to reach my land.” 3] By the impugned order, the said application has been rejected. Perusal of the said application shows that the petitioners are seeking police protection for the purpose of re­constructing a ramp which was allegedly demolished by the first respondent. The said application is not merely an application for seeking police assistance for implementation of the order of injunction, however, same proceeds on the footing that the respondents have violated the order of temporary injunction. Therefore, unless there is a finding recorded that a breach of the said order has been committed, permission cannot be granted to the petitioner to restore the status­quo ante by constructing a ramp. The interests of justice will be served if the said application is ordered to be heard along with the Application under Rule 2­A of Order XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 4] Hence the petition is disposed of by passing following order: (a) The impugned order dated 16 th April, 2009 is quashed and set aside and the Misc. Application No.34 of 2009 is restored. (b) The said application shall be heard along with Application under Rule 2­A Order XXXIX of the said KBP 4928-09.sxw 3 Code. (c) The learned District Judge shall decide both the Applications as expeditiously as possible and preferably before the end of October, 2009. (d) All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open. (e) Writ Petition is disposed of above in the above terms. (f) In view of the dismissal of the Writ Petition, the Civil Application No.1246 of 2009 does not survive and is disposed of. ( A.S.OKA, J. )