1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1106 OF 2010 Nilesh Suresh Tapase .. Petitioner versus Suresh Tukaram Tapase & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Rajgopal Dravid for the petitioner. Mr.Prashant P. Kulkarni for respondent Nos.2 to 7. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 16th February 2010. P.C: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner is the original plaintiff. In a suit filed by the petitioner, temporary injunction was granted by the trial Court against the respondents restraining them from creating third party rights in respect of the suit property. In an appeal preferred by the respondent Nos.2 to 7, the Appellate Court has interfered and temporary injunction granted against the said respondents has been set aside. However, order of temporary injunction granted against the 1st respondent-1st defendant has not been disturbed. 2. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-plaintiff is based only on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Gajara Vishnu Gosavi Vs. Prakash Nanasaheb Kamble & Ors [2009 SAR (Civil) 1012]. 2 3. However, the decision of the Apex Court will not apply in the present case considering the substantive relief claimed by the petitioner. The substantive relief claimed by the petitioner relates only to his undivided share in the share of the 1st respondent-1st defendant in the property subject matter of the suit. No relief is claimed in respect of the undivided shares of the 2nd to 7th respondents. Interim relief has to be granted in aid of final relief. Considering the frame of the suit and the substantive prayer made in the suit, the Appellate Court has passed a discretionary order by which injunction granted against 2nd to 7th respondents has been vacated. 4. Considering the frame of the suit, no fault can be found with the order of the Appellate Court. As the suit is pending, any transactions made by the concerned respondents will be naturally subject to final outcome of the suit. Subject to what is observed above, no case for interference is made out. Writ petition is rejected. (A.S.OKA,J)