49-WP-4241-2026 (C).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4241 OF 2026 Savitri Yallappa Kamble ...Petitioner Versus Ramesh Mahadev Suryawanshi And Ors. ...Respondents ….. Adv. Dheeraj Patil (through V.C.),Advocate for Petitioner. ….. CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. DATE : 4th SEPTEMBER, 2026. P.C. : Heard Mr. Dheeraj Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petition is directed against concurrent finding of facts recorded by Courts below granting injunction against the petitioner. 3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that both Courts below committed error of jurisdiction in solely relying upon the Sale Deed executed by husband of the petitioner on 04.10.2024. It is submitted that husband had no authority and he was not owner of the suit land. The signatures on the Sale Deed are also disputed. It is submitted that mutation entry cannot be said to be conclusive proof. 4. The respondent No.1 has filed RCS No.71 of 2025 for injunction ZIP 1 of 2 49-WP-4241-2026 (C).doc along with application for interim injunction. After contest, the application Exhibit - 5 was allowed on 07.01.2026. Being aggrieved, Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.26 of 2026 was preferred. It was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 25.03.2026. 5. Both Courts below have recorded concurrent finding of facts giving weightage to the Sale Deed dated 04.10.2024 and Mutation Entry No.893. The petitioner did not challenge the Sale Deed executed by her late husband on 22.10.1986 by independent proceedings or by way of counter claim. No material is produced on record to indicate the possession of the petitioner. I do not find any perversity or illegality in the findings recorded by Courts below. No interference is called for. The petition stands dismissed. [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] ZIP 2 of 2