1 (WP 2403 of 2011) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2403 OF 2011 Ramesh Silk Mills ...Petitioner vs. Smt. Sheetal D. Kamdar & Anr. ...Respondents ----- Mr.V.Y. Sanglikar for Petitioner Mr.Amol Mhatre for Respondent No.1 ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 15th June, 2011 P.C. 1. The Petitioner is challenging an order passed by the Small Causes Court in Execution Application No. 65 of 2010 in R.A.E. & R. Suit No. 1230/4235 of 1979. The Plaintiffs filed an application for grant of police protection for execution of decree. The application was allowed. 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that in fact, the matter had traveled upto the Supreme Court and in the Supreme Court an order was passed, granting one year’s time to the Petitioner to vacate the suit premises and further direction was given to file an undertaking within a time bound period. It is submitted that accordingly, an undertaking as directed by the Apex Court was filed and 2 (WP 2403 of 2011) the said order was complied with by the Petitioner. 3. The grievance of the Petitioner is that in spite of compliance of the said order, the impugned application was made by the Plaintiffs though the period of one year has not expired. He relied on the certificate issued by the Supreme Court Registry, which shows that he had complied with the order of filing an undertaking. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Respondents -Original Plaintiffs submitted that a certificate was issued by the Registry of the Apex Court, in which, it was stated that the order passed by the Apex Court was not complied and in view of the certificate issued by the Assistant Registrar dated 18th January, 2011, the application was filed. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Respondents that since the Petitioner has now filed this certificate of the Apex Court in which it is clearly stated that the undertaking has been filed within time, the impugned order may be set aside. Liberty, however, may be given to apply for execution if the Petitioner does not vacate the suit premises after expiry of the time granted by the Apex Court. 6. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the Respondents-Original Plaintiffs, after taking instructions from the Power of Attorney Holder of 3 (WP 2403 of 2011) the Respondents, who is present in the Court, the impugned order is set aside. Writ Petition is allowed and rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)