1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5850 OF 2010 Dashrath Deorao Kachale ..Petitioner V/s Anant Manikrao Kachale and others. ..Respondents ......... Mr.A.N. Gaddime, Advocate for petitioner. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 7th July, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel. 2. The petitioner is the original defendant no.1 against whom ad-interim injunction was granted by the trial Court as per the order below Exh.5 rendered in suit (R.C.S. No.68/2009). The order dated 06.02.2010 had been challenged by the petitioner by filing Misc.Civil Appeal No.4/2010. In his appeal, the petitioner filed application (Exh.5) seeking stay to the order of injunction. The first appellate Court rejected his application. 3. It is pertinent to note that Misc.Civil appeal is yet not decided. Thus, issue regarding legality of the order passed by the trial Court is not concluded by the first appellate Court. Secondly, 2 without examining the merits of the matter, it may be stated that when temporary or permanent injunction order is rendered, there is no tenability of request for stay of such order. For, the order is executable only if breach of order is complained of and in the manner provided under the Procedure Code. The petitioner can not claim ad-interim relief and ought to have file, if it was so necessary, application for interim injunction during the pendency of the Misc.Civil Appeal. No case is made out to infer perversity in the impugned order of the first appellate Court, whereby stay application is rejected. The Misc.Civil appeal be expedited for final hearing. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/wp5850.10