1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.161 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.189 OF 2009 Vishal Bhupendra Mehta ..Appellant V/s Jaycee Homes Limited ..Respondent Mr.Aniruddha A. Joshi i/b.M/s.Meghraj & Associates, Advocate, for the appellant Mr.D.Madan with Ms.Pratibha Mehta i/b.M/s.Little & Co., Advocate, for the respondent CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATE : 2ND MARCH, 2009 P.C. . This appeal takes exception to the Order dated 20th January, 2009, by which order ad-interim reliefs are refused to the appellant/plaintiff. The Notice of Motion is as yet pending. 2. Though certain observations have been made at the ad- interim stage by the Trial Court. Considering the facts & 2 circumstances of the case, in my view, instead of interdicting at this stage, it would be appropriate if the Trial Court is directed to hear and decide the Notice of Motion within a particular time frame. Both the learned counsel are agreeable to the said course of action being followed. Hence, the following order. (i) The Notice of Motion Exh.3 filed by the appellant/plaintiff to be heard and decided by the Trial Court within a period of ten weeks from date. (ii) The respondent i.e. the defendant in the said suit to file his Affidavit-in-reply to the Notice of Motion within a period three weeks. Rejoinder, if any, to be filed by the plaintiff within a period of two weeks thereafter. (iii) It is explicitly made clear that the Notice of Motion would be decided on its own merits uninfluenced by the observations made in the impugned order, or the instant order. (iv) The above Appeal from Order and the Civil Application is accordingly stand disposed of. (R.M.SAVANT, J.)