1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR APPEAL AGAINST ORDER NO. 13 OF 2008 (Suresh Chunnilal Agrawal vs. Shri Niranjan Jagobaji Wase & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. AUGUST 14, 2008. Heard Shri Dewani, learned counsel for the appellant – original plaintiff, Shri Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.1 – original defendant No.1 and Shri Bhishikar, learned counsel for respondent No.2 – original defendant No.3. In a suit for specific performance, the trial Court had initially passed ex-parte ad interim order and restrained the present respondents from creating any third party interest and said order was vacated on 15.12.2007 after hearing parties, after noticing that all co-owners have not entered into an agreement for sale with present appellant. Thereafter, this Court has in present AO again continued said interim order. It is the contention of present appellant that the other co-owners had relinquished their shares in favour of Respondent No.1 (original defendant No.1) after receipt of valuable consideration and as such Respondent No.1 was 2 alone authorized and competent to enter into an agreement with the parties. During hearing, it has transpired that Respondent No.1 or Respondent No.2 are contemplating to create third party interest in the suit property. I do not find it necessary to delve more in the controversy and decide any issue on merits as its consideration may affect the decision by the trial Court. The suit is of the year 2006 and it is now at the stage of evidence. In the circumstances, the interest of justice can be served by directing the trial Court to expedite the trial and decide the suit as early as possible and in any case within a period of one year from the date of communication of this order to it. In the meanwhile, Respondent No.1 and 2 before this Court shall not create any third party interest in the suit property and the appellant/ plaintiff shall also not create any obstacle in their possession of suit property. In view of these directions, nothing survives in the Appeal against Order. The same is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.