IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1705 OF 2004 APPLICATION NO. 1705 OF 2004 APPLICATION NO. 1705 OF 2004 IN IN IN SECOND SECOND SECOND APPEAL NO. 789 OF 2001 APPEAL NO. 789 OF 2001 APPEAL NO. 789 OF 2001 Mrs.Malini Ebenezer Baker and another. ... Applicants. V/s. Mrs.Nola Jonathan Ranbhise. ... Respondent. S.D.Deshmukh i/b. A.V.Anturkar for the applicants. G.S.Godbole for the respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : V.C.DAGA, J. : V.C.DAGA, J. : V.C.DAGA, J. DATED DATED DATED : 5th July 2005. : 5th July 2005. : 5th July 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. : ---- ---- ---- . The above civil application was placed before me pursuant to the order dated 1st April, 2005 passed by Mr.Justice A.S.Oka; since the applicants, in this civil application, amongst other reliefs were seeking clarification of the order of status-quo passed by me on 8th April, 2003. 2. Heard rival parties with respect to need of clarification of the order in question. 3. Having heard and examined the order dated 8th April, 2003, in the backdrop of the submissions made, I do not think the said order needs any clarification. The order in question is crystal clear. Hence prayer seeking clarification of the order is rejected. 4. Prayer clause (B) of this application is independent of first part of prayer clause (A). Since I have already observed that no clarification of the order of status-quo dated 8th April, 2003 is necessary, it would be open for the applicants to move the Court dealing with the subject matter and seek appropriate relief on its own merits so far as undecided prayer clauses are concerned. All rival contentions in that behalf are kept open. 5. Civil application, to the extent decided by this order stands disposed of with no order as to costs. *****