1 4.ca -cac-5-09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION jmi CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5 OF 2009 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 508 OF 2008. Shri Partap G. Tulsiani. ..Applicant. vs. Mrs. Munni Aijaz Siddiqur & Ors. ..Respondents. .... Mr. N.V. Walawalkar, Senior Counsel, i/b. Mr. Suresh Sabrad, for Applicant. Mr. P.S. Dani, for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. .... CORAM : G.S. GODBOLE, J. DATE : 24TH AUGUST 2011. P.C. : Heard Mr. Walawalkar, Senior Counsel for the Applicant and Mr. P.S. Dani, for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. The Civil Application seeks following reliefs :- “(b) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to make payment of the maintenance charges and other outgoings from 1974 till 2008 which comes to Rs. 5,00,202/- as per Exhibit “C” and the arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 91,425/- as per Exhibit “D”. (c) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the above Civil Revision Application, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondents No. 1 to 5 to deposit the future rent i.e. from January 2009 onwards with respect to the suit premises at the prevailing market rate viz. At the rate of Rs. 150/- per Sq.Ft.” 2. R.A. Declaratory Suit and the R.A.N. filed by the predecessor in title of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 have been decreed/ allowed by the Trial Court and Appeal and Revision Application filed by the 2 4.ca -cac-5-09 Applicant has been dismissed. The standard rent is fixed at Rs. 475/- per month. Aggrieved by the said orders, the present C.R.A. is filed. 3. One of the grievances which was made was about non payment of the difference between the interim standard rent and the standard rent finally fixed. I am informed that even that difference has been paid. In any case, even if the said amount has not been paid; the Applicant can have recourse to such remedy as may be available in law. 4. The reliefs claimed in this Civil Application cannot be considered or held to be reliefs, which will be in the aid of the final relief which could be granted in favour of the Applicant in the substantive proceedings. 5. In view of this, the Civil Application is not maintainable and the same is rejected. [ G.S. GODBOLE, J. ]