1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.83 OF 2009 Sarthak Co-Op.Housing Society Ltd. ....Appellant V/s. Smt.Laxmibai Shankar Mungekar & Ors. ....Respondents Mr.S.C. Naidu i/b C.R. Naidu & Co. for the Appellant. Mr.J.S. Kini i/b Suresh Dubey for Respondent Nos.1 to 6. Mr.A.A. Kumbhakoni, Senior Counsel with Mr.Vishal Kanade i/b Sanjay Gawde for Respondnet Nos.7, 9 and 10. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & S.J. VAZIFDAR, JJ. DATE : 25TH JUNE, 2009. P.C. : 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. This Appeal impugns the interlocutory order dated 17.11.2008 passed in the Notice of Motion No.4474 of 2006 filed in Suit No.654 of 2007. 2. The learned single Judge noted that earlier order dated 23.10.2008 passed in Notice of Motion No.2985 of 2008 was already under challenge before the Division Bench and therefore the relief in terms of prayer clause (f) need not be separately granted and the same could be considered in its entirety by the Appeal Court. 3. Without going into the question whether the appeals 2 were filed on 17.11.2008 or not, there is no doubt that Notice of Motion No.4474 of 2006 is required to be considered on its own merits for hearing the prayers including prayer clause (f) and the same is not required to be considered in the Appeals filed by the respective parties impugning the earlier order dated 23.10.2008 which order was in respect of temporary tin shed which has been since then removed. 4. Hence the Appeal is allowed and the order dated 17.11.2008 is hereby set-aside. Notice of Motion No.4474 of 2006 is required to be decided by the learned Single Judge, afresh. (S.J.VAZIFDAR, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)