: 1 : Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4954 OF 2006 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4954 OF 2006 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4954 OF 2006 IN IN IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2103 OF 2006 FIRST APPEAL NO.2103 OF 2006 FIRST APPEAL NO.2103 OF 2006 Master Rahul J. Asoorya ...Applicant V/s. Dr. Subhalaxmi Atmaram Jaiswal & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.G.S. Godbole, Advocate, for the Applicant. Mr.K.K. Tated, Advocate, for Respondent No.1. Mr.I.M. Khairdi, Advocate, for Respondent No.3. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATE : 30TH JANUARY, 2008. DATE : 30TH JANUARY, 2008. DATE : 30TH JANUARY, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. In view of order passed in Civil Application No.5349 of 2007, the learned Advocte for the applicant states that he is not pressing prayer (a) at this stage and he wants to reserve his right to file a fresh application seeking prayer (a) at appropriate stage. He, however, states that he is pressing prayer (b) as there is an apprehension that on the basis of the impugned order granting probate, the first respondent may create third party interests. He submits that the first respondent may act upon the probate and create third party interests in respect of the property which is the subject matter of the : 2 : disputed Will. 2. I have considered the submissions. The first request made by the Advocate for the applicant deserves to be granted. The Advocate for the 1st respondent has made a statement that the 1st respondent desires to file a suit / appropriate proceedings for recovery of possession of the property in dispute from the applicant. Thus the 1st respondent has accepted the fact that the applicant is in possession of the disputed property. 1st respondent is also aware that First Appeal challenging the order granting probate has been admitted. Therefore, as of today it cannot be accepted that there is any apprehension that 1st respondent will create any third party interests. Therefore, there is no reason to grant prayer (b) as of today. 3. Hence, I pass following order:- "O R D E R" "O R D E R" "O R D E R" (a). The prayer (a) is rejected as not pressed. It will be open for the applicant to take out a fresh application praying for interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) : 3 : as and when an occasion to file such application arises. (b). Subject to what is observed above, prayer (b) is rejected. (c). Hearing of the Appeal is expedited. [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]