1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5105 OF 2009 (Govind Vithoba Zade & Anr. vs. Chandrabhan Namdeo Zade) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. NOVEMBER 25, 2009. Heard Shri Zoting, learned counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners – defendants claimed possession on the basis of unregistered agreement for sale on stamp paper of Rs.100/-. The respondent – plaintiff claimed possession on the basis of registered sale deed and he also placed on record necessary 7/12 extract to justify his possession. The Courts below have concurrently held in his favour and have found that the present petitioners could not file any affidavit of their adjacent neighbour to show their possession. Shri Zoting, learned counsel for the petitioners has attempted to show that the document of agreement though unregistered, at this stage could have been accepted as evidence of possession. He has also relied upon the judgment in the case of Yadaorao vs. State of Maharashtra, reported at 1976 Mh.L.J. 31 to contend that 7/12 extracts are not final in such situation. 2 In view of the concurrent findings and as I do not find any perversity or jurisdictional error, no case is made out warranting any interference in writ jurisdiction. However, the proceedings in Regular Civil Suit No. 64 of 2008 on the file of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kalamb, are expedited and the said Court is directed to endeavour to decide the same as early as possible and in any case within one year from the date of communication of this order to it. With these observations, Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.