-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 369 OF 2009 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 369 OF 2009 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 369 OF 2009 ALONGWITH ALONGWITH ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 511 OF 2009 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 511 OF 2009 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 511 OF 2009 IN A.O. NO. 369 OF 2009 Ramesh Motilal Sethiya .. Appellant. V/s. Ms. Shobha Motilal Sethiya & Anr. .. Respondents. --- Mr.S.D.Thokade i/by Rajan Salvi for the Appellant. Mr. Ashok Bhatewara & Usha Y. Thakur for the Respondents. --- CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 13th APRIL, 2009 DATED : 13th APRIL, 2009 DATED : 13th APRIL, 2009 P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The appellant is the original plaintiff. He filed special civil suit no.818 of 2007 against the respondents for declaration that the gift deed executed by the respondent no.1 in favour of the respondent no.2 is null and void. The appellant -plaintiff has also filed an application at Exh.‘5’ for temporary injunction, restraining the respondents from creating third party interest in the suit property. The trial court, initially -: 2 :- granted status-quo; however, by the impugned order rejected the appellant-plaintiff’s said application. Therefore, the present A.O. 3. Mr. Bhatewara, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 makes a solemn statement that during the pendency of the above suit, the respondents will not create third party interest in the suit property. In view of this statement, the grievance of the appellant is redressed and as a result, nothing survives in the Appeal from Order. 4. However, as dispute is between brothers and sisters, interse, regarding a gift deed executed by the respondent no.1 in favour of the respondent no.2 and that the pleadings are already completed and the suit is at the stage of framing of issues, in my view hearing of the suit deserves to be expedited. The trial court is accordingly directed to hear and dispose of the special civil suit no. 818 of 2007 as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one year from the date of the receipt of the writ of this order. 5. Parties to A.O. undertake that they will co-operate for expeditious hearing of the suit and will not claim unnecessary adjournment. -: 3 :- 6. With the above directions, the Appeal from Order is disposed of. 7. In view of the disposal of the A.O., nothing survives in the Civil Application and the same is disposed of as such. (R.V.MORE,J.) .....