1 927.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 12072 OF 2026 UKHARDU RAWA PATIL VERSUS NIMBABAI HIMMAT PATIL AND OTHERS ... Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Warma Bharatkumar Ramdeo … CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 09th SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT : 1. The Petitioner is the original Defendant no. 5 in a suit bearing Regular Civil Suit no. 46/2021, instituted by the present Respondent no. 1, for canceling of sale deed and permanent injunction. An Application for temporary injunction in the suit filed by the Plaintiff, filed below Exhibit 6 was allowed vide order dated 10.02.2022, by the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Parola. 2. The Petitioner being aggrieved by the said decision, has preferred Miscellaneous Civil Appeal no. 04/2022, under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, before the District Judge - 2, Amalner, challenging the said order of injunction. The said Appeal was also rejected vide order dated 11.04.2023. According to the learned Advocate for the Petitioner while appreciating the documents placed on 2026:BHC-AUG:41954 2 927.odt record, the trial Court as well as the Appellate Court has failed to take into consideration the document which reflected the ownership of the present Petitioner. He submits that the property ownership card shows that a sale deed has been executed by Lukdu Ekoba who was the father of the Plaintiffs and the property was purchased by Yadav Ekoba who was the predecessor in title of the Respondent nos. 2 to 5. This important document has been totally ignored while granting injunction in favour of the Plaintiff. During the course of arguments, when the learned Advocate for the Petitioner was asked regarding what is the stage of the suit, he informs that the suit is at the stage of evidence. 3. Considering that the order impugned is dated 11.04.2023, and there are two orders passed in favour of the Plaintiffs, in my view, it would not be appropriate to interfere in the suit at this stage. However, considering the grounds raised by the Petitioner, it would be appropriate to request the trial Court to conclude the suit as early as possible preferably within a period of eight months from the date of this order. 4. With the aforementioned observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. ( MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. ) SPC