1 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.931 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3123 OF 2009 Chandrakant Ramchandra Patil & ors ..Applicants V/s. Vijay Ramchandra Patil & anr. ..Respondents Mr.Chetan G. Patil, Advocate, for the Applicants None for the Respondents CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 6TH MAY, 2010 P.C. . Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicants. None appears for the Respondents. Order dated 6th November, 2008 passed by the trial Court which is impugned in the Writ Petition does not specifically prevent the Applicant from carrying out repairs to the existing structure. The prayer in this Application is not only for permitting repairs but also for permission to construct additional premises. Permission to make additional structure cannot be granted. Grant of such permission at this stage will amount to modification of the impugned Order without hearing Writ Petition finally. 2 2. Considering the nature of the impugned order dated 6th November, 2008 permission deserves to be granted to the Applicants to carry out repairs to the existing structure provided the repairs do not materially change its original nature. 3. The Applicants will make an application to the trial Court setting out the precise nature of the repairs to be carried out to the Grampanchayat House No.439. The trial Court will appoint a Court Commissioner at the costs of the Applicants and will permit the Applicants to carry out repairs under the supervision of the Court Commissioner. The Applicants will not be entitled to claim equity on the basis of the repairs carried out. Application is accordingly disposed of in above terms. It is made clear that pendency of this Petition will not operate as a stay to the proceeding of the suit and the trial Court will proceed to decide the suit expeditiously. (A.S.OKA, J.) 3