1 AO No. 122 of 2007 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 122 OF 2007 (Bhaskar M. Wattamwar V. Tuljaram K. Rathod & ors) with CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9174 OF 2007 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr.P.V. Mandlik, Sr. Counsel i/b Amol Gandhi , Advocate for the appellant Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for respondent No. 1 Mr. A.K. Chitnis Advocate for respondent No. 2. Smt. Ranjana Reddy, Advocate for respondent No. 3 PER COURT : 1. This Appeal From Order is filed against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nanded on 26th July, 2007 in Special Civil Suit No. 245 of 2006 on Exh. 39, which was the respondent / defendant’s application for 2 AO No. 122 of 2007 temporary injunction. The appellant is the plaintiff. He said that he had purchased the suit land and has become owner of the same. He also said that he is in possession. He sought declaration of his title and perpetual injunction against the defendants. He has already succeeded in getting an interim order preventing the respondents / defendants’ interference in the suit land. On the other hand, the respondents / defendants have filed written statement, in which they seriously challenged the title even of the vendor of the plaintiff. The respondents / defendants through this application Exh. 39, expressed their apprehension that the appellant is trying to alienate the suit property. The learned Judge of the trial Court passed the impugned order and prevented the appellant / plaintiff from creating third party interest in the suit land. The reason why this order was passed is simple and it is to avoid multiplicity of litigation. Even today, the learned Sr. Counsel Shri P.V. Mandlik, 3 AO No. 122 of 2007 makes a statement on instructions that his client is ready to give undertaking to Court below and during the pendency of the suit that his client would not alienate, create third party interest of any kind in respect of the suit property till the disposal of the Civil Suit No. 245 of 2006 or deal with the property in any way. In view of this statement, the purpose of filing of application Exh. 39 has come to an end and the same stands dismissed. In view of the statement recorded above and in view of undertaking i.e. proposed to be filed before the trial court, appeal stands allowed. The order of the trial Court stands set aside. In view of the disposal of the Appeal From Order, Civil Application No. 9174 of 2007 does not survive. The same is also disposed of. 4th March, 2011 ( A.V.NIRGUDE, J. ) SDM*