1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3485 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 967 OF 2007 IN FIRST ECOND APPEAL NO. 1946 of 2006 Ganpat Dnyanu Deshmukh ... Applicant/Appellant (Orig. Defendant No.2) Vs. Sou. Mangal Tanjai Pisal & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.Vivek Salunke i/b. Mr. P.B.Shah,Advocate for the applicant.. Mr.dilip Bodake, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE: 4th August, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The appellant had purchased 13 Ares of open land from the minor daughters of his sister under a registered sale deed executed by his sister and on that open land, the appellant has made some construction of residential and commercial premises. The minor daughters of his sister filed the suit challenging the sale deed. The sale deed was declared null and void and the present appellant, who is the original defendant No.2, was directed to hand over the 2 vacant possession of the property and to hand over symbolic possession of the property in possession of the tenants. Against that judgment and decree, the defendant No.2 has preferred First Appeal No.1946 of 2006. That Appeal is already admitted. 3. In that Appeal, Civil Application No.3485 of 2006 was filed by the appellant for stay to the execution of the decree. Ad-interim stay was granted by this Court as per the order dated 22.9.2006 directing the appellant to deposit Rs.15,000/- quarterly with the Court on the basis that the approximate rent was Rs.5,000/- per month. The appellant has filed an affidavit of herself and the tenants to show that total rent recovered by him is Rs.4,400/- per month. It includes the rent for commercial as well as residential premises. In reply, an affidavit was filed by Pralahad B. Pawar, the father and power of attorney holder for the original plaintiffs/respondent Nos. 1 and 2. According to him, the total rent is Rs.10,100/- per month. After that, th appellant filed C.A. No.967 of 2007 seeking modification of the order dated 22.9.2006. 4. Admittedly, the property purchased by the appellant was an open land on which he has made construction of a building consisting of residential as well as commercial premises situated at Karad, District Satara. For construction, 3 he had taken loan and that instalments are being deducted from his salary. The original owners i.e. the plaintiffs could expect to earn rent or profit of the open plot without any construction. Taking into consideration all these circumstances, in my considered opinion, deposit of Rs.3,000/- per month would be just and reasonable. 5. Therefore, the order dated 22.9.2006 stands modified and the appellant shall be required to deposit the rent amount in the Court at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month i.e. Rs.9,000/- quarterly beginning with September, 2006. Subject to this, the execution of the impugned decree shall remain stayed pending the Appeal. Both the Applications stand disposed of. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)