1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.484 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4506 OF 2005 ... Mr.Sayed Mustafa Hussaini and ors. ...Applicants Bhogilal Dharamsi Chotalia and ors. ...Petitioners v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondent ... Mr.Ravi Kadam, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Harinder Toor, Mr.S.B.Pawar & Mr.S.G.Bane i/b S.K.Legal Associates for the Applicants. Mr.V.P.Shastri i/b Raymond & Co. for the Respondent No.10. Mr.Pandey i/b M/s.Pandey & Co. for the Petitioners. ... 2 CORAM: D.K. DESHMUKH & A.R.JOSHI,JJ DATED: 11 th March,2010 P.C.:- 1. This application is taken out for modification of the interim order 19-1-2006 passed in Writ Petition No.4506 of 2005, in so far as it directs the parties to maintain status quo in relation to the final plot No. 348. 2. The case of the Applicant is that in the petition the Petitioners claim that they were tenant of original plots Nos.344 and 512, therefore, they have rights in relation to the final plots Nos.344 and 512. 3. The case of the Applicant is that the final plot No.348 was not allotted in the 3 Town Planning Scheme in lieu of original Plots Nos.344 and 512. It was allotted in lieu of Original Plot No.329. The Petitioners, therefore, according to the Applicant, cannot claim any interim order in relation to final Plot No.348. 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant invited our attention to the extract of the Town Planning Scheme, which is filed at Exh.C to the civil application, which shows that final Plot No.348 was allotted in lieu of original plot No.329. 5. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that in the award that has been passed by the Arbitrators, there is a direction made for accommodation of the tenants of Original Plots Nos.344 and 512 on Final Plot No.348. But the learned Counsel is 4 not in a position to substantiate this position on the basis of the award of the Arbitrators. In our opinion, therefore, as the record stands today there is no material to show that the Petitioners have any right in relation to final plot No.348. 6. In this view of the matter, therefore, in our opinion, following order would meet the ends of justice. O R D E R (i)The interim order passed by this court dated 19-1-2006, in so far as it relates to Final Plot No.348 is vacated. However, the Petitioners shall be at liberty to claim interim order in relation to final Plot No.348, after producing necessary documents and joining additional parties, 5 if necessary. (ii)Civil Application disposed of. ( D.K. DESHMUKH,J.) ( A.R.JOSHI,J)