1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR C.A.S.NO.226 OF 2010 IN S.A.NO.386 of 2008 (D) Nagrik Gruha Nirman Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. ..vs.. Smt.Sitabai wd/o Kamaji Kaphanichor and others. =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr.Rohit Joshi Adv. for the appellant. Mr.D.L.Dharmadhikari Adv. for resp.no.1. Mr.V.D.Muley Adv. for resp.no.1 to 7. C ORAM : C.L.Pangarkar, J. DATED : 19th March, 2010. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondents. 2. This court had heard this appeal on admission and by order dated 3rd of March, 2010 observed that there is no substantial question of law involved in the appeal. The appeal, therefore, came to be dismissed. The court, however, had permitted the appellant to take appropriate steps by filing proceedings for claiming ownership of the property. Shri Rohit Joshi, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the appellant desires to move the Supreme Court against the order passed by this court. 2 3. It appears that this court on 21st October, 2008 had directed that the appeal shall be heard finally, since it was not possible to resolve the controversy at the admission stage itself. It was, therefore, directed that the status quo shall be maintained till 19th November, 2008. Further on 24th March, 2009, this court had again passed an order that the parties shall maintain status quo as well as the development may not be withheld. However, there is a use of words 'in the meantime'. The appellant contends that the said words denote that the status quo would continue till admission of the appeal. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the said words mean that a status quo was to be maintained only up to the next date as mentioned in the order dated 24th of March, 2009. It appears that no further order has been passed. Without going into the question what is the meaning of the words 'in the meantime', I deem it fit to grant four weeks more time to the appellant to move the Supreme Court in the matter. In the meantime, it would, therefore, be desirable that the respondent shall not create any third party interest in the property. JUDGE. chute 3