FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURNAGABAD Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directios and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 16 CA/12111/2011 ,In FA/2783/2011 RANJIT SUKHDEO MASKE AND ORS VERSUS CHATRABHUJ SUKHDEO MASKE AND ORS ... Advocate for applicants : Mr. M.S. Karad h/f Mr. Thombre S.S. Advocate for Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr. H.V. Tungar ... CORAM : A. V. POTDAR, J. Dated: December 01, 2011 ... PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. This civil application is filed seeking stay to the judgment and decree passed in Special Civil Suit No. 83/2009 by Jt. Civil Judge, Sr.Dn., Beed on 12-7-2011. 3. In the impugned decree respondents were declared as owners of the suit property and the sale-deeds executed in favour of appellants were declared as null and void and not binding on them. There is also decree of perpetual injunction. On notice, learned counsel Mr. H.V. Tungar appears for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. He also accepts notice for respondent No. 4. It is informed across the bar during pendency of suit before the Court below, order of temporary injunction was passed in favour of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 which was continued throughout the FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURNAGABAD Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directios and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS pendency of the suit and was confirmed while the suit was disposed of. Thus, the fact is clear that during pendency of the suit at no point of time appellants / applicants were in possession of the suit property and they are not likely to loose possession because of the decree passed by court below. 4. Considering this aspect, relief in terms of prayer clause ‘C’ cannot be granted. So far as decree of declaration is concerned, if appellants anticipate any alienation of the property during pendency of appeal, then the law is well settled that in case there is alienation and appeal is allowed, the person who will acquire the property during pendency of appeal will not get any better title than the title of respondent Nos.1 to 4. In the light of this, there are no reasons to grant stay to execution and operation of the judgment and decree impugned. Stay application is rejected. ( A. V. POTDAR, J. ) ... dyb