1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 108 OF 2009 ALONG WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 264 OF 2009 Mahesh Gopinath Dadarkar & ors. ... Appellants v/s Smt.Shubhangi Ramesh Raut & anr. ... Respondents Mr.Rakesh Pandey for the appellants. Mr.P.N.Ganwani i/by K & K for the respondent No.1. Mr.Rajesh Karkare for the respondent No.2. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 27TH JANUARY, 2010 P.C.: 1. The appellants have moved this Court contending that the order passed by the Trial Court refusing interim relief to them is erroneous. 2. The plaintiffs have filed a suit before the City civil Court seeking an injunction restraining the respondents/ defendants from dispossessing them from the suit property 2 i.e. the plot of land bearing C.T.S.No.22 admeasuring 5926 sq. meters situated at Village Shimpoli, Borivali (W), Mumbai. An injunction has also been sought by the plaintiffs against the defendants from creating any third party rights or interests and/or carrying out any construction in respect of the suit property. 3. On a perusal of the order passed by the City Civil Court, it is obvious that the Court has found that there is prima facie no merit in the appellants’ contention that they are in possession of the suit property. The Trial Court has therefore not committed any error in refusing any interim relief to the appellants. However, in my view, the observations made by the Trial Court with respect to the title of the plaintiffs to C.T.S. No.22, at Village Shimpoli, Borivali (West), Mumbai, must be read to be limited to the issue of possession. Admittedly, a partition suit has been filed in this Court being Suit No. 3149 of 2008. The issue of the appellants’ title to the suit property would therefore naturally have to be considered by this Court and the observations made by the City Civil Court with respect to the title of the plaintiffs’ to the suit property will not be binding on the Court while dealing with the partition suit. 3 4. Appeal from order dismissed along with the civil application. 5. The learned advocate for the appellants states that, in view of the aforesaid order the appellants will withdraw the suit pending in the City Civil Court. ..... 4