:: 1 :: rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 874 OF 2008 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 874 OF 2008 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 874 OF 2008 ....................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda . of Coram, appearances, Court’s . Orders or directions and . Registrar’s Order Court’s or Judge’s Order ....................................................... Ms.Deepa Ahuja for Appellants. Mr.R.D.Soni i/b.M/s.Ram & Co. for Respondent No.1. CORAM : S.J.VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J.VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J.VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 10TH OCTOBER, 2008. DATE : 10TH OCTOBER, 2008. DATE : 10TH OCTOBER, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- . The impugned order warrants no interference. There is nothing to indicate that the termination of the M.O.U. in favour of the Plaintiffs/Respondent No.1 was justified. There are no breaches :: 2 :: indicated by Respondent No.1 which would entitled the owners to terminate the agreement. The mere fact of termination would not disentitled the Plaintiffs to interim reliefs in a suit for specific performance. Nor would the fact that the owners have entered into an agreement with the Appellant make any difference in the present case. The Plaintiff’s agreement was terminated without any basis even before the time for the payment of the first instalment had arrived. 2. The Appeal from Order is, therefore, disposed of. (S.J.VAZIFDAR, J.) (S.J.VAZIFDAR, J.) (S.J.VAZIFDAR, J.)