1 227 ao.397.06 ndm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 397 OF 2006 Sudam Kisan Gamane. ... Appellant Versus Smt. Lata Ashok Kale and others. ... Respondents ----- None for the Appellant. Mr. M.M.Sathaye for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. ----- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 02 nd May, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT: 1 None appears for the Appellant. Heard the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2 The Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the original plaintiffs and the Appellant is the defendant No.1. In a suit for specific performance of agreement for sale of immovable property, temporary injunction was granted in favour of Respondent Nos.1 and 2 restraining the Appellant and other defendants from disposing/alienating the suit property till the 2 227 ao.397.06 decision of the suit. 3 The appeal from order was placed before this Court on 10 th October, 2006. A detailed order has been passed by this Court after hearing both the parties. The relevant part of the order reads thus: “..... Learned counsel for the respondents no.1 and 2 produced for my inspection agreement & receipts showing that out of Rs.31,00000/-, Rs.21,00000/- have been paid. Learned counsel for the appellant disputes this and contends that Rs. 16,00000/- have been paid. The total consideration is Rs. 31,20,000/-. The respondents must therefore deposit at least Rs.10,50,000/- in the trial court. Accordingly order of injunction is modified during the pendency of the appeal as follows:- (i) There shall be injunction as ordered by the trial court subject to respondents depositing Rs.10,50,000/- in the trial court within a period of two weeks. On such deposit being made the amount shall be invested by the trial court in accordance with the application that may be made by the parties to it. In case amount is not deposited in two weeks the injunction shall stand vacated after two weeks.” 4 The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 has produced for perusal of this Court a receipt dated 8 th November, 2006 issued by the trial Court by which a sum of Rs. 10,50,000/- has been deposited by the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 with the trial Court. Hence, there is a substantial compliance with order dated 10 th 3 227 ao.397.06 October, 2006. Hence, in view of the aforesaid order dated 10 th October, 2006, the impugned order which is an order granting limited interim relief deserves to be continued. 5 Hence, in view of substantial compliance with the order dated 10 th October, 2006, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the said order. 6 All contentions of the parties on merits of the suit are kept open. [ A.S.OKA, J ]