1 Ash FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1674 OF 2010 ALONG WITH ` CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2435 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2944 OF 1997 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders. Shri S.P. Kanuga for the Applicant/Petitioner. Shri A.B. Tajane for Respondent Nos.2(a) to 2(e). -- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 24TH AUGUST, 2010 P.C.: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 2(a) to 2(e). 2. The applicant is the tenant who is original petitioner in the writ petition. In the writ petition, the challenge is to the decree of eviction. Rule was issued and interim order of stay of execution of the decree was passed. The writ petition was dismissed for non- 2 prosecution on account of non-compliance of a procedural order of this Court. By an order dated 31st July, 2009, the writ petition has been restored. The occasion for filing the present application arose as the decree for possession under challenge is tried to be executed. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.2(a) to 2(e) submits that this application can be heard only by the same learned Judge who has passed the order dated 31st July, 2009 of restoration of the Writ Petition. In support of the said submission, the learned counsel could not point out any provision of law or rule. 4. Only the category of the applications which are referred to in sub-rule 3(1) of Chapter XXX of the High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 are required to be placed before the same Judge. The present application is not covered by the said sub-rule. Therefore, preliminary objection raised by the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.2(a) to 2(e) is overruled. 4. The order of restoration passed by this Court does 3 not indicate that the Court did not intend to restore the interim relief which was operating in the writ petition. However, as the decree for possession was sought to be executed pending final hearing of the writ petition, it is necessary to pass a specific order of restoration of the interim relief granted in the writ petition. 5. Hence, the applications are disposed of by passing the following order. Interim relief granted on 7th July, 1997 in the Writ Petition stands restored subject to condition that if the applicant is in arrears of rent, he shall deposit the entire arrears of rent due and payable as of today with the Trial Court within a period of six weeks from today. (A.S.OKA, J)