-: 1 :- SPB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3259 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 2707 OF 2008 Kokilaben P. Parekh & Anr. .. Plaintiffs. V/s. M/s. Aditya Developers & Anr. .. Defendants. --- Mr. Yadunath Chaudhary i/by Kunal Cheema for the plaintiffs. None for the defendants. --- CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATED : 21ST OCTOBER, 2008. DATED : 21ST OCTOBER, 2008. DATED : 21ST OCTOBER, 2008. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : . Heard the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs in support of the notice of motion. He states that notice of motion has been served on the defendants and an affidavit of service has been filed. 2. The plaintiffs have filed the aforesaid suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale executed by the first defendant developer in their favour by which the first defendant -developer agreed to sell a premises in favour of the plaintiffs. -: 2 :- 3. The case of the plaintiffs is that they have paid substantial consideration to the defendant no.1. The defendant no.1, according to the plaintiffs, has not completed the construction and so far only four floors of the building have been constructed. Apprehension is that the defendants may create third party interests. Ad-interim relief has been granted on 23rd September, 2008. There is no reply filed by the defendants. 4. Pending a substantive suit for specific performance, injunction in terms of prayer clause (a) deserves to be granted. 5. At this stage prayer clause (b) cannot be granted. However, the plaintiffs will be entitled to apply for interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b) at an appropriate stage. 6. Hence, notice of motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). 7. Parties concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order. (A.S. OKA, J.) -: 3 :- .....