1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.805 OF 2010 Shri Mahadeo Jagannath Bansode ...Petitioner Versus Sou.Meena Shrimant Pawar ...Respondent ...... Mr.K.B.Sonwalkar for Petitioner. Mr.Machhindra Deshmukh i/b Umesh Mankapure for Respondent. ...... CORAM:- A.S.OKA, J. DATED:- FEBRUARY 25, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent. 2. The Petitioner is the original Plaintiff. In a Suit filed by him, an application for temporary injunction was made. The Trial Court rejected the Application for temporary injunction. An appeal was preferred by the Petitioner before the District Court which has been dismissed by the impugned Judgment and Order. 2 3. The Respondent has placed on record an Undertaking dated 22nd February 2010 on oath. In the said Undertaking, the Respondent has stated that even if construction is carried out by her, she will not claim equity on the basis of the construction. She has stated that she will not create any third party rights in respect of the suit property and she will not part with possession of the suit property till the disposal of the Suit. She has also stated that if the Suit is finally decided against her, she will hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property to the Petitioner. 4. The undertakings contained in the Undertaking tendered today are accepted. The Undertaking is marked `X’ for identification. The Undertaking sufficiently protects the interest of the Petitioner, especially when the Suit is pending. 5. In view of the Undertaking of the Respondent, no interference is called for with the impugned orders. Subject to the Undertaking of the Respondent, the Petition is disposed of. (A.S.OKA, J.) 3