(1) WP 1573.2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1573 OF 2011 Nagnath Sopan Gade PETITIONER VERSUS Hanumantdas Hiralal Mundada RESPONDENT ..... Mr. V.J. Dixit, Sr. Advocate i/b. Mr. L.V. Sangeet, Advocate for the Petitioner. ..... CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 4TH MARCH, 2011 ORAL ORDER:- 1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Shri Dixit with Advocate Sangeet for the petitioner-defendant. Trial Court as also appellate Court have concurrently protected possession of respondent-plaintiff. Shri Dixit points out that the agreement for sale in pursuance of which petitioner has been placed in possession is produced on record by respondent- plaintiff himself, there are affidavits of the neighbouring owners supporting his possession and the fact that electric meter is obtained by petitioner- defendant though in a room belonging to the State (2) WP 1573.2011 Government on record demonstrate the possession of the petitioner. He further states that appellate Court has continued status quo which continues to operate till today and in these facts that status-quo be continued further and suit should be expedited. 2. Perusal of the impugned order shows that appellate Court has looked into all the facts. Though the petitioner-defendant claims to have erected a wire fencing that fact was not substantiated. His claim of digging a well was also not substantiated and though he claims to have constructed a room and obtained electric supply therein, the room was found constructed by the Government i.e. Public Works Department. It has then found that all revenue records supported possession of the respondent-plaintiff. Thus, after considering the relevant material, finding of trial Court has been upheld. As I do not see any jurisdictional error or perversity, I am not in a position to interfere in the matter. 3. However, proceeding in Regular Civil Suit no. 5 of 2010 are expedited and trial Court is (3) WP 1573.2011 directed to decide the same as early as possible and within one year from the date of communication of the order. 4. With these directions, Petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/- [B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.] arp