1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7941 OF 2009 Ms.Anjali M.Thakur .. Petitioner versus Harishchandra D. Hinge .. Respondent Mr.Nitin Vhatkar i/by Mr.G.S.Hiranandani for the petitioner. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 17th September 2009. P.C.: . Not on board. Taken on board. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner is the original plaintiff. In a suit filed by the petitioner against the respondent, a decree has been passed for eviction on the ground of bonafide requirement. An appeal was preferred by the respondent defendant before the District Court. Appeal has been admitted. Pending an appeal, by impugned judgment and order dated 1st September 2009, the Appellate Court granted stay of execution of the decree for possession. The Appellate Court directed the respondent to deposit the rent regularly and to pay the costs of suit as a condition of grant of stay. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that no 2 prima facie case was made out for grant of stay in view of the admissions brought on record during the course of recording of evidence and therefore, the Appellate Court could not have granted stay. 4. A substantive appeal challenging decree for possession has been admitted by the Appellate Court. The result of the impugned order is that till the disposal of the appeal, the decree for possession cannot be executed. This is not an order which can be interfered with any extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petition is rejected. (A.S.OKA,J)