903-WP-12387-2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 12387 OF 2026 Mangesh Dattatray Ghumatkar and Ors ..Petitioners Versus Manik Bajirao Patole and Ors …Respondents Mr. Pranav H Bhoite, for the Petitioners. CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER 2026 ORAL ORDER.: 1. Heard Mr. Pranav Bhoite, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners. 2. The challenge in this Petition is to an order dated 7th September 2026 passed by the learned District Judge, Khed-Rajgurunagar, whereby an Application preferred by the Petitioners-Appellants seeking stay to the execution and operation of an order passed by the learned Civil Judge on 1st August 2026, directing Defendant No. 8-Municipal Council, Rajgurunagar, not to excavate the suit plot of the Plaintiffs except the 15 ft width area of the suit plot reserved for the public road, came to be rejected. 3. Mr. Bhoite, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that, a 30 ft wide area separates the plots of the Petitioners and the Plaintiffs, and the 15 ft area abutting the plots of the Plaintiff has already been ARS 1/2 ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Digitally signed by ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Date: 2026.09.30 17:42:02 +0530 903-WP-12387-2026.DOC developed by the Plaintiffs and 15 ft area of the suit plot through which Defendant No. 8-Municipal Council is permitted to excavate for laying the drainage pipeline falls to the share of the Petitioners in the sanctioned layout. Thus, if stay is not granted the Petitioners will suffer irreparable loss. 4. As the Miscellaneous Civil Appeal preferred by the Petitioners awaits adjudication before the Appellate Court and the trial Court has specifically permitted the Municipal Council to excavate the 15ft wide area reserved for public road, for laying the drainage pipeline, at this juncture, there is no propriety in entertaining this Petition. 5. In the circumstances of the case, this Court considers it expedient to direct the District Judge to hear and decide the Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 39 of 2026, finally as expeditiously as possible and, preferably, within a period of two months from the date of communication of this order. 6. Petition disposed. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] ARS 2/2