Advocates:
['SHRI ATUL P VANARSE', 'SHRI MANDAR LIMAYE', '', 'APPEARANCE']

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

REVIEW PETITION NO.5 OF 2009

IN

SECOND APPEAL NO.74 OF 2009

Shri Hanumanta Timma Pujari

(Since decease through L/rs.) and 20 Ors.

....Petitioners

Versus

Shri Narhari Balku Kawade

(Since deceased through L/rs.) & 10 Ors.

...Respondents.

Mr. Atul P. Vanarse for the Petitioners.

Mr. Mandar Limaye for the Respondents.

CORAM : R. V. MORE, J.

DATED : 25^th AUGUST, 2009.

P.C.

Heard Mr. Vanarse, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and

Mr. Limaye, learned Counsel for the Respondents.

2.

By the Order dated 25^th November, 2008 the above Second Appeal

was dismissed on the ground of concurrent findings of fact of both the Lower

Courts below that the Respondents are the owners of the suit property and the

Petitioners are in unauthorized possession of the same.

3.

Mr. Vanarse, learend Counsel, now submits that in fact the suit of

the Respondents was not maintainable in view of the provisions of

Order 7 Rule 3 as applicable to Maharashtra, in as much as the map/sketch of

the encroached portion is not annexed to the plaint filed by the Respondent. I

do not find any merit in the submission as