1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 93 OF 2009 ALONG WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 113 OF 2009 Moreshwar Shankar Joshi & anr. ... Appellants v/s Anup Jayant Mhalgi & ors. ... Respondents Mr.R.S.Apte with Mr.M.S.Lagu for the appellants. Mr.G.S.Godbole with Ms.Jai V. Maskar for the Resp. No.1. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 1ST DECEMBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. The appellants who are defendants 1 and 2 before the Trial Court have approached this Court contending that all the respondents have played a fraud on them, while entering into a sale for the suit property with them. It is the contention of the appellants that the suit property had been sold to them by respondent No.1 through respondent No.3 who acted as his natural guardian. Respondent No.2, the father of respondent No.1 has confirmed the sale and, 2 therefore, the entire action of the respondent No.1 after attaining the majority, claiming that the sale was illegal, is not bonafide, submits the learned counsel for the appellants. 2. In my view, the order impugned in this appeal from order need not be interfered with as this is an interim order which has been passed in July, 2008. The appellants are restrained from creating third party interest and carrying out any construction till the disposal of the suit. This order has been passed in order to protect the suit property and, therefore, it need not be altered or modified. 3. The appeal from order is, therefore, dismissed along with the civil application. 4. However, the Trial Court will decide the suit uninfluenced by any observations made while passing the order for temporary injunction. If any application is filed by the appellants for repairs to the existing structure on the suit property, which according to the appellants is a farm, it shall be decided by the appellants in accordance with law. ..... 3