KBP 3675-07.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3675 OF 2007 Tejaram Fojaram Jakhad ..Petitioner Vs. Ramchandra Hemraj Unecha ..Respondent ......... Mr.J.P.Singh, for petitioner. Mr.Sanjay Kshirsagar, for respondent. ......... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 10 th August, 2009. P.C. : 1] Considering a narrow controversy involved in this writ petition the same is taken for final disposal at the stage of admission. 2] The petitioner is original defendant and respondent is original plaintiff. The respondent filed a summary suit against the petitioner and by order dated 16 th April, 2006 the learned trial Judge has granted unconditional leave in favour of petitioner to defend the suit. An application was made by the respondent in the pending suit for attachment before judgment. By the impugned order dated 16 th April, 2007 the said application has been allowed. The operative part of the said order read thus: OPERATIVE ORDER 1] Application is allowed. 2] Defendant is directed to furnish an undertaking to KBP 3675-07.sxw the effect that during pendency of present suit he would not dispose off immovable properties Shop No.5 “A” Wing S. No.45-1B Hadapsar, and Flat No.10 S.NO.11 New 13/1A/88+89 Katraj. 3] Defendant is directed to furnish security in the form of Bank guarantee to the extent of Rs. 6,00,000/- to the effect that in breach of undertaking he would make good losses by way of Bank guarantee. 4] On failure to give undertaking and bank guarantee as stated above within a period of 15 days would disentitle him to the relief granted to him under application Exh-15 in the present suit.” 3] By order dated 8 th May, 2007 passed by this court the petitioner was directed to comply with the condition incorporated in Clause No.2 of the operative part of the impugned order quoted above. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has complied with the said part of the operative order, and by order dated 8 th May, 2007 this court has stayed the operation of clauses 3 and 4 of the order dated 16 th April, 2007. 4] The order granting unconditional leave to defend has attained the finality. Clauses 3 and 4 of the operative part of the impugned order run directly contrary to the order granting unconditional leave which has attained finality. If the said clauses 3 and 4 are allowed to operate, the same will defeat the order granting unconditional leave. Therefore, the said clauses 3 and 4 of the impugned order will have to be quashed and set aside. Hence I pass the following order: KBP 3675-07.sxw (a) The petitioner has already complied with the clause No.2 of the operative part of the impugned order. Clauses No.3 and 4 of the operative part of the impugned order are quashed and set aside. (b) All contentions of the parties in the pending suit are kept open. Hearing of the suit is expedited. (c) Writ petition is partly allowed in above terms. No order as to costs. ( A.S.OKA, J. ) KBP 3675-07.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.536 OF 2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3675 OF 2007 Tejaram Fojaram Jakhad ..Applicant Vs. Ramchandra Hemraj Unecha ..Respondent ......... Mr.J.P.Singh, for applicant. Mr.Sanjay Kshirsagar, for respondent. ......... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 10 th August, 2009. P.C. : 1] This Civil Application does not survive and the same is disposed of. ( A.S.OKA, J. )