1 CRA NO.65/2010. 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.65/2010 WITH CA NO.9509/2010. (Smt. Madinabee w/o Aziz Shah Vs. Milind Bagwat and Ors.) ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Shaikh Ashpak Taher Patel, Adv. For revision applicant; Mr.PB Patil, Adv. For Respondent No.1. *** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 3 rd DECEMBER, 2010. ... 1) Heard. 2) Rejection of temporary injunction before the Presiding Officer, Wakf Tribunal, is questioned. 3) The respondent, as a purchaser occupied the property, however, thereafter by virtue of sale­deed dated 7.4.2008, he has sold the property to the subsequent purchaser. The proceedings are initiated by petitioner before the Wakf Tribunal on 5.7.2008, three months after the conveyance, referred above. Said 2 CRA NO.65/2010. Purchaser in spite of his mutation entry is not arrayed in the said suit. 4) Prima facie, the documents support the purchaser to be in possession of the suit property. 5) CRA lacks merit, dismissed with CA. No costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/