: 1 : 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.18 OF 2008 Ramesh Fakira Morade ..Applicants/ (Orig.Appellat & Orig.Deft.No.16) Vs. Smt.Sushila Girdharilal Batavia & Ors. ..Respondents. (Nos.1to 3 are Orig.Plffs. & Nos.4 to 18 are Orig.Deft.Nos.1 to 15) Mr.Uday P. Warunjikarfor the Appellants. Mr.Girish S. Godbole for Respondent No.2. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 15TH APRIL, 2008 DATED : 15TH APRIL, 2008 DATED : 15TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : The impugned order warrants no interference. Although it is true that there is no document that connects Defendant No.16 to the transaction, the learned Judge has granted the injunction in view of all the facts and circumstances of the case. One of the circumstances is that the vendors were all part of a family and they were represented by some of the Defendants. All the Defendants reside in the same area. None of them responded to the public notice. : 2 : 2. Although the aforesaid facts could not by themselves establish the transaction qua Defendant No.13, I see no reason to interfere. 3. In the circumstances, the Appeal from Order is dismissed.