* 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5854 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2256 OF 2008 Vinayak B.Shingade & Ors. ....Applicants vs. Sonba P.Yedage ....Respondent ======= Mr.ArjunWadkar, Advocate for Applicants. Mr.Uday Warunjikar,Advocate for respondent. Coram: Smt. R.P.SondurBaldota, J. Dated: 9 th June 2009 PC : 1. This Civil Application in the First Appeal is taken out for two interim reliefs. Firstly to restrain the respondent inter- alia from disposing off the suit property and/or creating any third party rights over the same. Secondly to restrain the respondent from disturbing the peaceful possession of the applicants over the suit property. The application is opposed by the respondent. 2. As regards prayer clause (b) of the Civil Application is concerned, there is no material whatsoever before the court to even remotely indicate that the applicant has been in possession * 2 * of the suit property. Therefore, there can be no injunction for protection of alleged possession. 3. As regards the first relief, Mr.Arjunwadkar the learned counsel for the applicant submits that if this relief is not granted it may lead to multiplicity of the proceedings, in the event, the respondent disposes of the suit property to a third party. Mr.Warunjikar, the learned counsel for the respondent referring to the plaint filed by the applicant submits that the case of the applicant in the plaint has been a fanciful case, which has been rightly rejected by the trial court. Admittedly, the respondent became the owner of the suit property by a registered deed of conveyance. It is alleged by the applicant that this deed of conveyance was obtained by the respondent from the applicant’s father by playing fraud upon him. Mr.Warunjikar has produced a copy of the plaint. According to the plaint, applicant’s father was kidnapped by some gundas and after getting the document signed by him, he was murdered. It is further alleged that the dead body of the father was brought back to the village and it was handed over by the police to the applicant. It appears that the applicant filed a complaint with the police on 12th September, 1997 regarding the death of his father which was neither pursued by the police nor the * 3 * applicant. The entire story of the applicant has been rejected by the trial court, after considering the evidence in support thereof. In these circumstances, I am of the opinion that there is hardly any merit in the case of the applicant as regards the allegation that the registered deed of conveyance executed by his father in favour of the respondent is obtained by practicing fraud or cohercion or undue influence or that the same is unlawful. In that circumstance, there cannot be any unnecessary restraint put upon on the rights of the respondent over the suit property. Hence, the Civil Application is dismissed. ( Smt.R.P. SondurBaldota,J.)