1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 1770/2011 (Shivshankar Laxmi Khadgi VERSUS Pandurang Laxman Khadgi) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mrs. S.N. Deshpande, counsel for the petitioner. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : APRIL 13 , 2011 . Heard. The first appellate Court did not commit any error in staying the effect and operation of the judgment passed by the trial Court directing the present respondent to handover the vacant and peaceful possession of the suit shop to the petitioner-plaintiff within a period of three months from the date of the judgment. The first appellate Court considered the fact that the defendant-respondent claimed to be the joint owner of the suit property and in such circumstances, since no money decree was passed in favour of the plaintiff, it was necessary to stay the effect and operation of the judgment during the pendency of the first appeal. The order does not suffer from any jurisdictional error so as to interfere with the same in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. In the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. The first appellate Court is, however, directed to decide the first appeal as early as possible. JUDGE APTE