1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1275 OF 2008 Priyanka Developers .. Petitioners Versus M/s.Build Craft Corporation .. Respondents Mr.R.S.Datar for petitioners Mr.A.Y.Sakhare, Senior Advocate with T.J.Vejhurani for respondents. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 25th March 2008 P.C. . Petitioners are the original defendants in Regular Civil Suit No.86 of 2008 which has been instituted by respondent - plaintiff. 2. In that suit, an application for interim injunction was filed by the original plaintiff and it appears that temporary injunction has been granted in their favour. At the same time, petitioner defendants also applied invoking 2 inherent jurisdiction of the trial court for a direction to the original plaintiff to maintain status quo in respect of the suit property. 3. The temporary injunction granted by the trial court is the subject matter of challenge in Misc.Civil Appeal before the appellate court at the instance of petitioners who are original defendants. That appeal is pending. Mr.Sakhare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents states that application for interlocutory relief in the pending appeal is preferred which has been heard but the same has been adjourned till 3rd April 2008. Now the learned Judge has even placed the misc.appeal on board on that date. 4. Mr.Sakhare, learned Senior Counsel urges that the application under section 151 preferred by the petitioners was clearly not maintainable inasmuch as the defendants have yet to file written statement and counter claim so also their 3 remedy, if any is under Order 39 Rule 4 of the C.P.C. They can also file a substantive suit by impleading their vendors and present plaintiffs as parties and seek appropriate relief. 5. Mr.Datar for petitioner states that all this would take time and until petitioners make appropriate application, status quo as of today at site be maintained. Mr.Datar is disputing that the original plaintiff is in possession. 6. On the other hand, Mr.Sakhare states that the original plaintiff alone is in possession and none else has been inducted so also no rights have been created in anybody’s favour by them. 7. In my view, saying anything more would prejudice the case of both sides in the pending appeal as also the suit. The matter is placed on 3rd April 2008 and the Appellate court shall endeavour and dispose of the appeal as 4 expeditiously as possible and preferably on or before 30th April 2008. All contentions of both sides in pending appeal are kept open. Similarly the petitioners can apart from pursuing the pending appeal, also initiate substantive proceedings and assert their right, title and interest in the immovable property. They can also seek modification of the order of injunction from the lower appellate court or from the trial court, if so advised. All such remedies and contentions therein are kept open. Petition disposed of. No costs. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)