2501cas785.10.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR C.A.S.NOs. 785 of 2010 and 786 of 2010 in S.A.N O.102 OF 1995. Mukund Keshaorao Munje ..vs.. The Registrar, Co-op. Societies and ors. ............................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................... Mr.J.T.Gilda, Adv. for the appellant. Mr.S.S.Khandekar Adv. for resp.no.9. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : 25th January, 2011. The above civil application and the companion civil application were on board when Advocate Mr.S.W.Sambre, the learned counsel appearing for respondent no.9, has pointed out that he has filed a pursis for discharge of his power. Respondent nos.1 to 8 have been served. The learned counsel Mr.S.S.Khandekar has put in his appearance on behalf of respondent no.9. By the above civil application, the applicant/ appellant seeks to join one Rajendra Ukandrao Jawalkar as respondent no.9 to the above appeal. The reasons therefor are mentioned in the civil application namely that the said respondent is a purchaser pendente lite. The learned counsel appearing for respondent no.9 has no objection to him being arrayed as a respondent to the above appeal. The civil application is, therefore, allowed. The learned counsel for the applicant/appellant to carry out the amendment in the cause 2501cas785.10.odt 2 title of the appeal within a period of two weeks from date. On behalf of respondent no.9, a affidavit-in-reply has been filed. The learned counsel for the said respondent no.9 waives notice on his behalf. List the second appeal for final hearing as per its turn. The civil application is accordingly disposed of. C.A.S.NO.785 OF 2010. By the above civil application, the applicant/appellant seeks an injunction pending the appeal. The above appeal was admitted and interim order dated 15/3/1995 to the effect that “In the meanwhile, the appellant shall not be dispossessed from the disputed property” was operating. Thereafter, it appears that respondent no.9, who has been added as a party by an order passed today in another civil application, has purchased the property in question from respondent no.8. The above civil application was moved some time in September, 2010. Thereafter, on 29/10/2010 a learned Single Judge of this court had directed the parties to maintain status quo as time was sought on behalf of respondent no.9 to file a reply to the above civil application. Thereafter, order of status quo has been continued by order dated 01/12/2010. In my view, considering the conspectus of the above facts, it would be just and proper that pending the hearing and final disposal of the appeal, the parties are directed to maintain status quo. The civil application is disposed of. JUDGE chute 2501cas785.10.odt 3