1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.194 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13970 OF 2010 Ganesh Nandu @ Mugaji Kotkar and anr. ..Appellants Versus Sau.Sandhya Vijaykumar Bothe ..Respondent Mr N.C.Garud, Advocate for appellants CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 7th December 2011 PER COURT Heard Mr Garud extensively. 2. The learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar in Special Civil Suit No.155 of 2011 by order dated 9.9.2011 did not entertain Exh.5 for injunction, made the plaintiff aggrieved and hence, the Appeal from Order. 3. The order does not call for interference for the simple reason, the learned Judge has recorded variation in the dates of the agreement and the purported payments. Without adverting to merits thereof, the fact remains, the earnest itself is in cloud. Consequently, even if the request for clamp of injunction from alienation is said to be innocuous, rejection thereof does not call for interference. Liberty to the plaintiff/appellants to register their lis under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act before the appropriate authorities. Appeal from Order dismissed with Civil Application. No costs. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. ) (var/194.11ao)