1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10522 OF 2009 Mohammad Husen Mujawar and others Petitioners versus Usman Ibrahim Mujawar Respondent D.M.Gupte for petitioners. S.S.Patwardhan for respondent. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 27th January 2010 PC :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent. In a substantive appeal preferred by the petitioners against a decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No.63 of 2006, by the impugned order, the learned District Judge has declined to stay the decree for possession passed against the petitioners. 2. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that considering the conduct of the petitioners and considering the earlier orders operating in the field, this was a fit case where the Appellate Court should have rejected the prayer for stay and in fact the same 2 has been rightly rejected. He submitted that though the reasons assigned by the Appellate Court may not be satisfactory, there was material placed before the District Court for rejecting the request of stay. 3. If submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent is to be accepted, the District Court will have to be directed to rehear the application for stay. I find that there were two cross suits filed and by a common judgement both the suits have been disposed of. The learned counsel for the respondent states that the respondent has also preferred an appeal for challenging the decree. 4. Considering the controversy involved, instead of directing the Appellate Court to rehear the application for stay, interests of justice will be served if the appeal preferred by the petitioners and the appeal preferred by the respondent are heard and decided expeditiously. 5. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of by passing following order:- (A) Regular Civil Appeal No.145 of 2009 filed by the petitioners as well as Regular Civil Appeal (St) No.1569 of 2009 filed by the respondent shall be heard and decided finally by the District Court as 3 expeditiously as possible and in any event on or before 30th April 2010; (B) Till disposal of the appeal, the decree for possession passed by virtue of clause no.4 of the operative part of the decree of the Trial Court will remain stayed; (C) All contentions of the parties on merits are expressly kept open. (A.S.OKA, J.)