ash 1 caf-4522.10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4522 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.917 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders. Shri S.P. Munghate for the Applicant. Shri S.P. Kanuga i/by Ms Sapna N. Nath for Respondent No.2. -- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 26TH JULY, 2011 P.C.: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the Applicant and the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd Respondent. The 2nd Respondent is the original Plaintiff and the Applicant is the original Defendant. The operative part of the impugned decree reads thus:- “1. Suit of plaintiff is partly decreed in terms of prayer clause (a). The defendants, their agents, or anybody claiming through defendant is restrained from taking forcible possession or interfering possession of the plaintiff over suit property without following due process of law. ash 2 caf-4522.10 2. Prayer of mandatory injunction in terms of prayer clause (b) is refused. 3. No order as to costs. 4. Decree be drawn up accordingly.” 2. During the pendency of the suit by an order dated 5th December, 2007, the Trial Court directed the parties to maintain status quo as regards the suit plot. Admittedly, there was no prohibitory injunction granted during the pendency of the suit in terms of the impugned decree of injunction passed by the Trial Court. Though the Trial Court granted a decree of prohibitory injunction against the Applicant/Defendant, a prayer for mandatory injunction made by the 2nd Respondent for removal of the name board of the Applicant on the suit plot has been rejected under the impugned decree. There is a finding recorded that the Applicant is an allottee of the suit property and that the Applicant/Defendant has put up a name board on the suit property. 3. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, a case is made out for grant of stay of execution the decree passed by the Trial Court in terms of prayer clause (a). However, interim order operating during the pendency of the suit will have to be continued till disposal of the ash 3 caf-4522.10 Appeal. Hence, I pass the following order:- ORDER: (a) The operation of the impugned decree of prohibitory injunction will remain stayed till the final disposal of the Appeal. (b) The order of interim relief dated 5th December, 2007 passed by the Trial Court in Notice of Motion No. 2722 of 2006 shall continue to operate till the final disposal of the Appeal. (c) There will be no orders as to costs. (A.S.OKA, J)