1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1251 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1565 OF 2009 Naikaware Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Appellants. v. Mr. Shantilal R. Oswal ...Respondent. Mr. P.K.Dhakephalkar a/w V.R.Kasle i/by M/s. Ram & Co. advs.. for the Appellants. Mr. Y.S.Jahagirdar, Sr.Counsel a/w. Pankaj J. Das, advs., for the Respondent No.1. Shri A.P.Kulkarni, adv. for the Respondent No.10. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : MARCH 17, 2010 P.C. 1 Respondent/plaintiff filed Special Civil Suit No.1806/09 for specific performance of the contract entered into with deceased Chandrabhaga Daundkar and later on, confirmed by her legal heirs to the extent of 1/3rd share in the suit property and for partition and separate possession and for injunction. It is pointed out that suit lands bearing survey nos.178/2, 218/3, 221/3B, 222/1B, 223/1, 224/2, 224/1B, 228/2 and 280/1 admeasuring in all 11.98 acres are situated at Baner, Pune. Property originally belonged to one Bhimabai Walke and after her death, her son Appa and two daughters, Chandrabhagabai Daundkar and 2 Shantabai Kate. Plaintiff claims to have entered into contract with Chandrabhagbai on 1.1.03 to purchase her 1/3rd share for Rs.75 lac out of which he paid an amount of Rs.2.5 lac to her. After her death her legal heirs executed a confirmation deed for a consideration of Rs.1.1 crore on 7.9.2000. On the other hand, respondent nos.10 and 11 claim to have purchased shares of the all the three shareholders, i.e., Appa, Chandrabhagabai and Shantabai and thereafter they executed sale deed in favour of the certain co-operative society and then their firm, which is defendant no.9, was appointed as the developer by the said society. The trial Court directed defendants not to make any further construction or development or create any third party interest. That order is challenged before this Court. Mr. Dhakephalkar the learned counsel for the appellants, who are the original defendant nos.9, 10 and 11 pointed out that presently construction is in progress only on plot nos.1,2 and 3 while plot nos.4,5 and 6 admeasuring 8.18 acres is still lying vacant. He makes a statement that the appellants will not make any construction on the said 8.18 acres pending the suit. After some discussion at the bar, with consent of the parties, appeal stands disposed off with the following directions: i Defendant Nos.9, 10 and 11/Appellants shall not make any 3 development or construction in respect of the plot nos.4,5 and 6, being survey nos.224/2, 225/1B and 228/2 admeasuring 8.18 acres as shown in the map marked 'X' for Identification, pending the suit. They shall be permitted to make construction on the remaining portion of the suit land subject to condition that they shall not make any application for shifting the reservation. They shall also not use the FSI of the said 8.18 acres of land. 2 The trial Court shall as far as possible expedite the hearing and disposal of the suit. 3 Appeal stands disposed off accordingly. 4 As the appeal itself is disposed off, civil application does not survive and stands disposed off accordingly. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)