1 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. APPEAL NO. 72 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3008 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 2880 OF 2007 ALONG WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 984 OF 2009 IN APPEAL NO. 72 OF 2009 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3008 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 2880 OF 2007 M/s. Sheth Developers Pvt. Ltd. ..Appellant Vs. Vishwanath Yeshwant Sarmalkar ..Respondent Mr. Shekhar Shetye a/w Ms. Deepa Hate i/by M/s. Gajria and Co. for appellant. Mrs. S.A. Dhamale for respondent. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & S.J.VAZIFDAR, JJ. June 30, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard Mr. Shetye i/by M/s. Gajria and Co. the learned Advocate for the appellant-company. This appeal arises from the order dated 17/11/2008 thereby allowing Notice of Motion No. 3008 of 2008 filed in Suit No. 2880 of 2007. The said suit has been filed for specific performance of the agreement dated 25/8/2004. 2 2. As per the said agreement the shop, which was in occupation of the present respondent – original plaintiff and known as “Ramakant Flour Mill” situated in ECL Compound, Bangur Nagar, M.G. Road, Goregaon (W), Mumbai ( Shop No.4), was handed over to the present appellant for construction of a shopping mall which was more popularly known as “Vasant Gallaxy Project”. As per the same agreement Clause No.2, by way of temporary arrangement, the defendant had agreed to pay annual rent payable for a temporary accommodation so as to enable the plaintiff to conduct his business till the shop was ready in Vasant Gallaxy and the rental amount was fixed at Rs.7000/- per month. 3. We have perused the said agreement dated 25/8/2004 as well as the impugned order and we do not find any error committed by the learned trial judge in allowing the Notice of Motion by the impugned order. The said order is in keeping with the obligation of the defendant in terms of the agreement dated 25/8/2004 by way of temporary arrangement and we do not agree with Mr. Shetye that the impugned order by itself is a decree. 4. Undoubtedly, if the impugned order is not obeyed by the defendant, the plaintiff has his remedy to apply for further interim relief in the pending suit and even against the assignee, if any. 5. Appeal is dismissed. 3 6. Notice of Motion No. 984 of 2009 does not survive and the same shall stand disposed as such. (S.J.VAZIFDAR,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)