1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 566 /2010 (Vishwachand s/o Dalpat Sahare vs. Bhashkarrao Trinathrao Vai and another ) .................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Advocate for petitioner absent. Mr. D B Yengal APP for Respondent No.2. CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 6 th June, 2011. The petitioner and his Advocate, both are absent. The Respondent No.1 and his Advocate are also absent. With the help of Mr D.B.Yengal, learned APP, this Court has gone through the proceedings. It appears that the dispute regarding the property bearing City Survey No. 369 situated at Mouza Amgaon (Khurd) was raised before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate under section 145 of the Cr.P.C. The order passed by the learned SDM on 27.7.2009 was challenged in Criminal Revision No. 28/2009 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia who, after hearing the Revision petition, allowed it with directions against the opponent No.2 Vishwachand Dalpat Sahare (present petitioner) directing him not to disturb the possession of Gut No. 369 situated at Amgaon Khurd Tq. Salekasa Dist. Gondia on the basis that petitioner Bhaskarraorao Vai had possession of other Gut No. 369. 2 The learned APP invited my attention to Annexure “K” in the petition which is in relation to Regular Civil Suit No. 49/2008 pending in the Court of Civil Judge Jr.Dn, Amgaon in respect of the same property bearing Gut No. 369 situated at village Amgaon Khurd Tq. Salekasa Dist.Gondia. The plaintiff Trinathrao Vai had lodged the suit against Vishwachand Sahare had prayed for relief of permanent injunction against said Vishwachand Sahare to restrain him from disturbing the peaceful possession of the suit property which is the same property in respect of which the learned Addl. Sessions Judge had already passed an order in the nature of injunction in the impugned judgment and order. That being so, it is needless to state that the said order would be a subject to the order that may be passed in the pending civil suit and will live and survive accordingly till the competent Civil Court passes an order on merit in a pending civil suit. When suit is instituted on the basis of a legal right or title, it can be decided by the competent civil Court only; because the party cannot be allowed to invoke jurisdiction of the criminal court particularly when the parties are in a position to approach the competent Civil Court for an appropriate interim or final order, such as, injunction, appointment of receiver Court Commissioner etc. for adequate protection of the suit property during pendency of the dispute. Multiplicity of litigation is not in the interest of either of the parties and public time cannot be allowed to be 3 wasted in meaningless temporary or short-lasting litigation. That being so, Writ Petition is dismissed. JUDGE Sahare