1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 396 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1031 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO. 758 OF 2007 Saroj Amar Bhutani & Anr. ....Appellants Versus Anil Madan Lal Khanna ....Respondent Smt. Monika Bhagat, Advocate for the Appellants. Shri P. M. Shah, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM : P. B. MAJMUDAR & R. V. MORE, JJ. DATED : 9th DECEMBER, 2009. P.C.: Heard learned Counsel for the Appellants and Respondent. 2. In our view, considering the reasoning of the learned Single Judge, no interference is called for in this appeal against such interlocutory order, as it has been found out that even though the Plaintiff was in possession, he was dispossessed by the Appellants/Defendants without taking any recourse to law and that too, when the Order of status-quo was granted by the City Civil Court was in force. We do not find any substance in interfering with the order of the learned Single Judge. However, it will be open to the Appellants to recover the possession of the suit premises from the Respondent in accordance with law. These observations are to be treated as prima facie as suit under section 6 of the Specific Relief Act is still pending and this Appeal is filed against the interlocutory order. Subject to what has been stated above, the appeal is dismissed. The order of the learned Single Judge now to be executed. 2 3. In view of the disposal of the Appeal, the notice of motion no.3353 of 2009 will not survive and therefore, the same is also disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (R. V. MORE, J.) (P. B. MAJMUDAR, J.)