1 64 ao.1085.10 ndm FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1085 OF 2010 Mahadev Manohar Shahapurkar and others Vs. Dattatraya Manohar Shahapurkar and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr. S.S.Shah for the Appellants. Mr. Shriram Chaudhary i/b Mr.V.S.Talkute for the Respondents. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 02 nd May, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2 By the impugned order, the learned trial Judge has rejected the application for temporary injunction at Exhibit – 5 made by the Appellants. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondents has tendered an undertaking dated 28 th February, 2011 filed by the Respondents on oath. Clause (1) of the said undertaking reads thus: “1] In view of the said suit itself is fixed for recording evidence and is likely to be imposed of shortly on merits and therefore we the Respondents in the aforesaid Appeal and Original Defendant Nos.1 to 3 in Special Civil 2 64 ao.1085.10 Suit No.10/2009 undertake that not to alienate or create any third party interest in respect of the suit property without the permission of the Ld. Trial Court during the pendency of the suit.” 3 In my view, interests of the Appellants are sufficiently protected by the said undertaking during the pendency of the suit. The undertaking is accepted. 4 In view of the said undertaking, no interference is called for with the impugned order. Appeal from order is accordingly disposed of by keeping all rights and contentions of the parties on merits on the suit open. 5 If any application is made by the Respondent for grant of permission to create any third party rights, the trial Court will decide the same on its own merits after considering the objections of the Appellants. 6 Civil Application No.1338 of 2010 does not survive and the same is disposed of. [ A.S.OKA, J ]