1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPLICATION NO.1303 OF 2007 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.480 OF 1988 M/s.Sterling Trade .. Applicant Versus Ramavatar Kunjilal Gupta & Anr. .. Respondents Mr.K.R.Bulchandani i/b. M/s.P.Kumar & Co. for applicant Mr.Rafique Peermohite with Minesh Shah with Anup Khaitan i/b. Anup Khaitan & Co. for respondents Mr.S.Ramakanta, Dy.O.L. present. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 24th April 2008 P.C. . Applicants are seeking the following reliefs in the present application:- "(a) that consent terms dated 20th June 2007 entered into between respondent 2 No.2 and respondent No.3 in the said company application No.834 of 2006 in above company petition No.480 of 1988 be set aside; (b) that respondents be directed not to act upon the said consent terms dated 20th June 2007 entered into between respondent No.2 and respondent No.3 in the said Company Application No.834 of 2006 in the above Company petition No.480 of 1988; (c) that respondent No.2 be directed to release the said plot of land bearing survey No.395, Hissa No.8 admeasuring 7600 sq.mtrs. situated at Tigrania Nagar, New Agra Road, Mauje Nashik, within the Nashik Shivam Municipality Limits Dist.Nashik, Maharashtra, to the applicant No.2 on applicant No.2 settling 3 the said sum of Rs.21 lakhs of respondent No.2 and consequently to execute the necessary documents in favour of applicant No.2 for effective release of the said land from the mortgage; 2. After the company application was argued for some time it was brought to my notice that the property which is described in prayer clauses (c) and (e) is in possession of State Industrial and Investment Corporation (SICOM). The said Financial Institution has yet not handed over the property to respondent No.3. I, therefore, suggested to Mr.Bulchandani that the ex parte order passed on 10th December 2007 directing all parties to this application to maintain status quo with regard to disputed property may continue soas to enable the applicants to apply for appropriate reliefs in a competent civil court. Mr.Bulchandani, after taking instructions from Applicant No.1 who is present in court makes a 4 statement that the applicants would adopt appropriate proceedings as suggested, but this ad-interim order should be continued to enable them to do so. After hearing all parties who are present before me, I am of the opinion that the application can be disposed of by granting liberty to the applicants to institute appropriate proceedings to assert their right, title and interest in the said immovable properties and to enable them to do so, so also to obtain ad-interim/interim orders therein, ad-interim order dated 10th December 2007 shall continue for a period of eight weeks from today. 3. Application disposed of in the above terms. No costs. All contentions on merits are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the merits of the matter. 5 (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)