Rohit B. Deo, J.

Heard Shri R.M. Pande, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri A.N. Vastani, the learned Counsel for respondent.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the learned Counsels for the parties.

3. The petitioners who are the defendants in Regular Civil Suit 215/2013 is assailing the order dated 29.06.2017 rendered by the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Gondia, by and under which, the application preferred by the defendants under section 36B of the Maharashtra Prevention of the Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 ('Act' for short) for referring the issue of the effect of the provisions of the Act on the sale-deed, to the Competent Authority, is rejected.

4. Few facts, which are broadly not disputed or are irrefutable may be noted.

5. The respondent plaintiff instituted Regular Civil Suit 215/2013 against the petitioners seeking, inter alia decree of permanent injunction and possession qua the suit property.

6. The respondent plaintiff is claiming ownership of the suit property by and under registered sale-deed dated 30.09.2011.

7. It is not in dispute that by amending the written statement, the petitioners defendants took