{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.36 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2271 OF 2011 Shaikh Rasool s/o Shaikh Chand Petitioner Versus Shankar s/o Ambadas Gore & another Respondents Mr.S.S.Chaudhari, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.P.Salgar, advocate holding for Mr.S.B.Talekar, advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr.A.R.Tapse, advocate holding for Mr.P.D.Suryawanshi, advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 08th December, 2011 PER COURT: 1 Heard. 2 Rejection of Exhibit-5 in Special Civil Suit No.69/2009, by order dated 13.12.2010, is questioned by the plaintiff. 3 The learned Judge has found and recorded that the sale deed of the Respondent No.1 is of 1984. He has been, prima facie, proved to be in possession as owner of the property. His name is mutated in the Municipal record. The other aspect of the matter is, that the Respondent has already filed suit, which was {2} initially numbered as 228/2000 and in which, a decree was recorded on 31.01.2009. It was questioned by the Respondents in Regular Civil Appeal No.26/2009 and the matter was remanded by the learned Additional District Judge, Ambajogai. After the remand, the new number is given as R.C.S. No.68/2010 and pending before the concerned Court. In Writ Petition No. 1398/2010 filed by the Respondent, by order dated 20.04.2010, it was observed that: “In the situation, the injunction, which was flowing in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff, be treated as status quo as on the date of judgment dated 31.01.2009 in R.C.S. No. 228/2000.” 4 In this glaring situation, the order under challenge does not call for interference. 5 Appeal from Order dismissed. No costs. Civil Application stands disposed of. K.U.CHANDIWAL JUDGE adb/ao3611