: 1 : FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.748 OF 1994 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1252 OF 1994 IN B.C.C.SUIT NO.1667 OF 1994 -------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court’s or Judge’s orders of Coram, appearances, Court’s . orders or directions and . Registrar’s orders . -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.A.N. Samant for the Appellant. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 2ND JUNE, 2008. P.C. : 1. This Appeal from Order is filed against the order of the learned Judge of the Bombay City Civil Court dated 29th April/2nd and 3rd May, 1994 dismissing the Appellant’s Notice of Motion. The Appellant had filed the suit restraining the Defendants from disturbing their possession in respect of the suit property otherwise than by due process of law. By the Notice of Motion in which the impugned order was passed, the Plaintiff has sought : 2 : interim reliefs in terms of the above reliefs. 2. Various proceedings in respect of the suit property have also been filed in this Court one of them being Suit No.932 of 1994 filed by the Appellant herein against the Union of India, Respondent No.1 herein and several other parties. The Appellant had taken out Notice of Motion No.568 of 1998 in the said suit. By an order dated 9.2.1995, the learned single Judge made the Notice of Motion absolute in terms of the ad-interim order passed in that Notice of Motion on 5.3.1994. By that order, ad-interim relief was granted in terms of prayer (a) of the Notice of Motion by which the Defendants were restrained from disturbing or interfering with the possession of the Plaintiff therein i.e. the Appellant herein in respect of the suit property otherwise than by due process of law. The Appeal against the order dated 9.3.1995 being Appeal No.479 of 1995 was dismissed by an order dated 15.4.2004. : 3 : 3. In effect therefore the reliefs claimed by the Plaintiff in the present proceedings have in fact been granted in the proceedings filed in this Court referred to above. In view thereof, it is not necessary to consider the Appeal from Order as the Appellant has already succeeded in obtaining the same relief in the suit fled in this Court. 4. In the circumstances, the Appeal from Order is disposed of with the above clarifications and with liberty to the Appellant to apply, if necessary.