: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1112 OF 2009 Vijay Bahadur Gopinathnath Jaiswar ... Appellant V/s. Shri Fauzdar Gopinath Jaiswar & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.P.K. Mishra for Appellant Mr.V.R. Srivastava for Respondent Nos.1, 2 & 3 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: FEBRUARY 3, 2010 P.C.: 1. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 29.8.2009 by which the Notice of Motion filed by him has been rejected. According to the appellant, he has a right to continue in possession of the suit premises. The defendant, on the other hand, contends that he is entitled to exclusive possession of the suit premises. The appellant has obtained certain documents after making an application under the Right to Information Act. These documents, according to the appellant, indicate that the suit premises had been allotted to him. It appears that an application has already been moved by the appellant before the City Civil Court for bringing on record those documents which he has obtained after filing the suit. That application is yet to be heard and decided. The defendant is yet to file his reply. 2. In view of this, in my opinion, it would be appropriate to direct the City Civil : 2 : Court to decide that application within eight weeks from today. In case the application is decided in favour of the appellant and the documents are taken on record, the appellant may move a notice of motion for appropriate reliefs. If such a notice of motion is moved by the appellant, the same will be decided by the City Civil Court on its own merits uninfluenced by the order dated 29.8.2009. The appellant is today in possession of the suit premises. He will continue to be in possession of the same. However, the defendant may enter the suit premises and live with the appellant. 3. Appeal is disposed of accordingly. 4. In view of this, civil application No.1370 of 2009 does not survive and the same is disposed of accordingly.