1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 760/2010. Suryakant Babanrao Mundlik and another -: VERSUS :- Manish Vitthalrao Bompilwar and another. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : DECEMBER 16, 2010. Heard finally by consent of Shri S.U. Nemade, learned Counsel for petitioners, Shri Mohd. Atique, learned Counsel for respondent no.1 and Shri P.M. Pande, learned Counsel for respondent no.2. At the outset, learned counsel for petitioners points out that Regular Civil Appeal No.4/2009 filed by the petitioners/defendants is now ready for final hearing and can be decided immediately. He points out that private paper book is already filed and also makes a statement that if on application under Order 41 Rule 27 of Civil Procedure Code, moved by the petitioners/appellants in that appeal, an adverse order is passed, that order will be 2 challenged only after final adjudication in appeal. He contends that by impugned judgment and decree dated 06.12.2008, Civil Judge, Junior Division, Digras has decreed the suit of respondent no.1 for specific performance of contract and directed petitioners /appellants to execute sale deed and register it within a period of two months. He therefore, states that this directions needs to be stayed during the pendency of the appeal. Shri Pande, learned Counsel for respondent no.2 supports the contention of Shri Nemade, learned Counsel for petitioners. He states that the property forming subject matter is already mortgaged with respondent no.2 Urban Cooperative Bank. Shri Atique, learned counsel for respondent no.1/original plaintiff states that the property is in possession of respondent no.1 and hence, the Lower Appellate Court has correctly refused the grant of stay. It is apparent that by permitting respondent no.1/ plaintiff to have a sale deed in his favour as per the impugned judgment and decree of trial court, the situation will be further complicated. The petitioners have shown their bonafides by making a statement which are 3 already recorded above. In this situation, operation and effect of the impugned judgment and decree dated 06.12.2008 in Regular Civil Suit No.123/2005 passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Digras, deserves to be stayed during the pendency of Regular Civil Appeal No. 4/2009. The same is accordingly stayed with direction to appellate court to attempt to decide the appeal on merits as early as possible and in any case by 15.02.2011. Parties inform that the matter is fixed today before that Court. Parties to communicate this order to that court and to proceed further as per its instructions. Petition is thus partly allowed. No costs. JUDGE Rgd.