1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6276 OF 2008 ALONG WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8141 OF 2008 Smt. Nagesari Samaldar Chawan. ... Petitioner V/s. Shri. Milind Atmaram Sankhe ... Respondent AND Shri. Baijnath Shripal Das & Ors. ... Petitioners V/s. Shri. Milind Atmaram Sankhe ... Respondent .................. Shri. Krishna N. Kore for Petitioner. Shri. V.A. Gangal a/w Ashok Gade for Respondent in both the cases. .................. CORAM : S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J DATE : 16th June, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard Mr. Krishna N. Kore appearing for the petitioner. The courts below have concurrently held at the prima facie stage that the plaintiff could not give a proper description of the property and identification thereof. Therefore, the court is unable to assist him. This reasoning of the trial court has been confirmed in paragraph No. 6 of the order of the lower Appellate Court. Having perused the same, I am of the opinion that no case is made out for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Petitions are therefore dismissed. However, all 2 observations are tentative and prima facie in nature and shall not influence the court while trying the suit. Similarly, the order does not mean that the petitioner – plaintiff is precluded from placing on record such document and material for identification of the property. S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. ndm/wp6276.08