SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION PRECIPE IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.357 OF 2009 Chittaranjandas Damodardas Shah ...Appellant. v. Ashwin B. Shah & Anr. ...Respondents. Mr. Bipin Joshi, adv. For the Appellant. Mr.Pravin Samdhani i/by M/s.Dhruve Liladhar and Co., adv. For the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : DECEMBER 2, 2010 P.C. 1 Appeal was filed by the original plaintiff against the rejection of his notice of motion by the trial Court wherein he had sought a relief restraining the defendants/respondents from creating any third party interest in the suit property. When the appeal came up before this Court, with consent of the parties said order was modified only to the effect that any transfer, which may be made by the defendants pending the suit shall be subject to the result of the suit in view of the provisions of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. It means as far as merits of the case are concerned, this Court has not observed anything. 2 Precipe is filed by the learned counsel for the respondents contending that the plaintiff has issued letters dated 1.11.2010 to the - 2 - tenants asking them to continue to pay monthly rent to them and he had referred to the order of this Court in Appeal From Order No.357 of 2009. Infact, right of the plaintiff to collect the rent was neither subject matter of the notice of motion nor this Court has passed any order in that respect. Order of this Court was simply to say that any transfer by the defendants pending the suit would be subject to the provisions of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act and nothing more. If the plaintiff claims any right to recover the rent, he can move an appropriate application before the appropriate Court, who will decide the same on its own merits. 3 With this clarification precipe stands disposed off. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)