1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.4 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. OF 2008 IN SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO.2258 OF 2008 Ashwin Bansilal Shah & anr. ..Appellants V/s Chittaranjandas Damodardas Shah ..Respondent Mr.P.K.Samdani, Senior Counsel, Ms.Trupti P. Shetty, Mr.Darshan R. Mehta & Mr.N.Bajaj i/b.M/s.Dhruve Liladhar & Co., Advocate, for the appellants Mr.Bipin Joshi, Advocate, for the respondent No.2 CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATE : 6TH JANUARY, 2009 P.C. . This appeal can be disposed of finally at the admission stage. The appeal takes exception to the Order dated 12th December, 2008, passed by the learned Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay in Short Cause Suit No.2258 of 2008. In the said suit, the above Notice of Motion was filed for interim reliefs and the same was moved for ad-interim reliefs. The learned Judge whilst considering the said application for ad-interim reliefs has prima facie come to a conclusion 2 that no case for grant of ad-interim relief is made out by the plaintiff. However, thereafter, has totally misdirected himself by directing the defendants to maintain status-quo till filing of reply to the above Notice of Motion. If the learned Judge had reached the said conclusion, there was no warrant to direct the defendants to maintain status-quo. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants/defendants has drawn my attention to the averments in the plaint. The suit has been filed simplicitor for injunction and it is an admitted position that after the death of the father and mother of the defendant No.1, the Share Certificates in respect of the premises in question stand in the name of the defendant No.1. On behalf of the respondent, my attention is drawn to various documents to buttress the submission that the plaintiff has interest in the property in question. In my view, the respective cases of the parties would be dealt with by the Trial Court at the time of the hearing of the Notice of Motion. However, as indicated above, the Trial Court has misdirected itself in directing the defendants to maintain status-quo when the Share Certificates of the 3 premises in question admittedly stand in the name of the defendant No.1. Since the Notice of Motion is pending, the appeal is disposed of in the following terms. (i) The direction of the Trial Court to maintain status-quo till filing of reply to the Notice of Motion is set aside. (ii) The defendants i.e.the appellants herein to file their reply to the Notice of Motion within a period of two weeks from date. (iii) The parties to complete inspection etc. within a period of one week from date. (iv) The Trial Court is directed to hear and decide the Notice of Motion within a period of six weeks from date. 3. Needless to say that all the contentions of the parties are kept open and the Trial Court would decide the Notice of Motion on its own merits and uninfluenced by any observations made in this order. (R.M.SAVANT, J.)