* 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4076 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1638 OF 2006 Shri. Dashrath Baburao Naik ..... Applicant V/s. Shivaji Fakira Bhambare ....... Respondent ---------- Mr.S.M.Sabrad, adv.for applicant. Mr.Girish Godbole, adv.for respondent. CORAM: SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J. DATED: 13TH APRIL, 2009. P.C. : 1. Heard counsels for both sides. 2. This Civil Application is taken out for vacating the order dated 23rd January, 2007 allowing Civil application No. 3191 of 2006 for stay of the impugned order. The only basis for filing the application is that though the applicant had filed a caveat and notice of caveat was directed to be issued to the respondent to the application, the order was passed without hearing the applicant. The present Civil Application is opposed by the respondent stating that the notice of caveat was never served upon the respondents. It is also contended that the interim order passed in the appeal does not cause any prejudice whatsoever to the applicant. 3. The present appeal challenges decree of specific performance. * 2 * On 28 th July, 2006 when the appeal was admitted, ad-interim order staying the impugned order was also passed and notice came to be issued to the present applicant on the Civil Application. On 23rd January, 2007 the ad- interim order was confirmed after noting that none had appeared for the respondent, who was served. Thus, though the ad-interim order was without notice to the applicant, it's confirmation was only after service of the notice upon the applicant. Further, the interim order directs renewal of fixed deposits from time to time, thereby securing the amount deposited by the applicant. In the circumstance, it is not necessary to go through the exercise of setting aside the interim relief and then hearing the applicant. The Civil Application is dismissed. [SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA , J]