1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 279 OF 2009 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 328 OF 2009 Bansilal Shrikisan Bhutada & anr. ... Appellants v/s Namdeo Valu Bodke & anr. ... Respondents Mr.R.A.Thorat i/by Mr.Tushar Sonawane for appellants. Mr.A.B.Tajane for respondent No.1. Mr.S.D.Shinde for respondent No.2. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 9TH FEBRUARY, 2010 P.C.: 1. The appeal from order has been preferred against the order of the Trial Court refusing to grant interim relief to the appellant. The appellant has filed a suit for specific performance in respect of the property being City Survey No. 1171, Municipal House No.538 of Tryambakeshwar, Tal. Tryambakeshwar, Dist. Nasik, to the extent of 55.90 sqare meters. The appellants/plaintiffs have claimed the specific 2 performance of agreements dated 9.1.2008 and 23.2.2004. According to the appellants, they have paid a sizeable amount towards the consideration for the property and, therefore, they ought to have been granted interim relief. The appellants have contended that respondent No.1, from whom they have purchased the property, has entered into an agreement of sale for the same property with respondent No. 2 and therefore they claimed an injunction against both the respondents. 2. Parties were directed to maintain status-quo as on 6.3.2009. 3. The learned advocate for respondent No.2 has no objection to maintain status-quo as of today during the pendency of the trial. In view of this statement being made by the learned advocate for respondent No.2, the appeal from order is disposed of accordingly. 4. The learned advocate for respondent No.1 has not consented to the order. However, in view of the fact that respondent No.1 in any event is not in possession of the suit property, no prejudice would be caused to respondent No.1 if the aforesaid order is passed. 3 5. Appeal from order disposed of accordingly along with the civil application. ..... 4