: 1 : SD 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 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5667 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5667 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5667 OF 2007 IN IN IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2582 OF 2007 FIRST APPEAL NO.2582 OF 2007 FIRST APPEAL NO.2582 OF 2007 Dilip Dattaram Agre ...Applicant V/s. Sudhakar Tukaram Satam ...Respondent Mr.S.S. Redekar, Advocate, for the Applicant. Mr.Sandesh Patil, Advocate, i/b. Vikas K. Mahangare, for the Respondent. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATE : 16TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATE : 16TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATE : 16TH FEBRUARY, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Advocates appearing for the parties. 2. In the suit filed by the applicant, he claimed to be in possession of area of 20 ft. x 7 ft. The suit has been dismissed. The applicant has filed an undertaking dated 30th November, 2007 which is marked as "X" for identification. To the said undertaking he has annexed a plan in which he has shown a stall admeasuring 6 ft. x 7 ft. The undertaking records that he will confine his existing business only to the said stall. : 2 : 3. The submission of the Advocate for the respondent is that there is no material whatsoever on record to show that the applicant is in possession of any part of the suit property. He submitted that the suit filed by the applicant has been dismissed by the Trial Court by holding that the applicant has failed to establish his possession. It is submitted that even going by the own case of the applicant, the area of the stall is not 6 ft. x 7 ft., but it is a smaller area. It is submitted that no case is made out for grant of any interim relief. 4. I have considered the submissions. There is some material on record to show that the applicant is running a PCO booth. My attention has been invited to the finding recorded by the Trial Court in paragraph No.14 and 15 of the Judgment. As a result of the undertaking dated 30th November, 2007, now the applicant is confining his prayer for interim relief to a stall admeasuring 6 ft. x 7 ft. which is shown on the sketch marked as Exhibit "A" to the undertaking dated 30th November, 2007. 5. The Appeal has been admitted for final : 3 : hearing. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, a limited interim relief deserves to be granted. Hence, Application is disposed of by passing following order :- "O R D E R" "O R D E R" "O R D E R" (a). The respondent is restrained from interfering with possession of the applicant over the stall admeasuring 6 ft. x 7 ft. more particularly shown on the map at Exhibit "A" annexed to the undertaking dated 30th November, 2007 till the final disposal of the Appeal. (b). The statements made in the undertaking dated 30th November, 2007 are accepted. (c). It is made clear that the applicant will not be entitled to claim possession over any area except the said stall admeasuring 6 ft. x 7 ft. (d). In case the applicant commits breach of any undertaking, without prejudice to the other remedies available to the respondent, it : 4 : will be open for the respondent to move this Court for vacating the interim relief. (e). The applicant is restrained from creating any third party interests in respect of the stall admeasuring 6 ft. x 7 ft. which is referred to in the undertaking. (f). There will be no order as to costs. [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]