1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 6008/2006 Smt. Asha Neelesh Bhagat ...vs... Sou. Mandakini Devidas Shinde and Ors. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 9 th April, 2008 1. Heard Mr. Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sohoni, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 and Mr. Khanzode, learned counsel for respondent No. 4. 2. The petitioner is original plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No. 48/2005 pending on the file of Civil Judge Junior Division, Chikhli filed for partition and separate possession against the respondents. In the aforesaid suit, the petitioner preferred an application at Exh.-27, restraining the respondents from alienating or creating any third party interest in the suit property. This application was allowed by the trial Court on 14.06.2006 and the respondents, thereafter, preferred Misc. Civil Appeal No. 22/2006 before 2 the lower appellate Court. The lower appellate Court by the impugned order dated 23.11.2006 allowed the respondents' appeal and the trial Court's order Exh.-27 came to be set aside. 3. The lower appellate Court vacated the injunction initially granted by the trial Court in petitioner's favour on the ground that the decree of divorce is already passed against petitioner in a proceeding filed by her husband Neelesh Bhagat and the appeal filed by the petitioner is also dismissed as abated, in view of death of said Neelesh Bhagat, and though the petitioner has taken out application for setting aside abatement that application is still pending. Be that as it may, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the petitioner has no locus to file suit for partition. 4. That view of the matter, I do not find any error in the impugned order. The petition is devoid of merit. The same is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. 3 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is at liberty to apply afresh for the similar relief claimed by her in the trial Court in case the abatement of the appeal against the decree of divorce is set aside. JUDGE kahale