-1- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1170 OF 2004 APPLICATION NO.1170 OF 2004 APPLICATION NO.1170 OF 2004 IN IN IN FIRST FIRST FIRST APPEAL NO.304 OF 2006 APPEAL NO.304 OF 2006 APPEAL NO.304 OF 2006 Madanlal Bhojraj Chandema ...Applicant vs. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bomba & others ...Respondents Mr.V.S.Kapse for the Applicant Mr.J.J.Xavier for the Respondents. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : JANUARY 8,2008. : JANUARY 8,2008. : JANUARY 8,2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Advocate for the Applicant and the Advocate for the first Respondent. There are two prayers in this Application. The first is for stay of execution and operation of the impugned Judgment and Decree and the second is for temporary injunction restraining the Respondents from creating third party interests in respect of stall No.44. 2. The first prayer cannot be granted as the suit filed by the Applicant-Plaintiff has been dismissed. In so far as the second prayer is concerned, this court in order dated 19th July 2006 has recorded a statement of the Advocate for the first Respondent that the stall No.44 (now stall No.1148) has been allotted to one Zeenat D. Varma. 3. In view of this position, a limited protection can be -2- granted to the Applicant. 4. Hence, the application is disposed of by directing that first to third Respondents shall not further transfer the said stall to any other party without prior permission of this court. There will be no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE