1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 873 OF 2010 Ramesh Shankarlal Bhandari ........Appellant versus Sheventabai Rambhau Sondekar ........Respondent. Mr.R.B. Paranjape i/b J.D. Khairnar adv. for the Appellant. Mr. J.S. Deo adv. for the Respondent. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI,J. DATED : 30th August, 2010. P.C.: 1. Admit. (B. R. GAVAI, J.) 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2404 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 873 OF 2010 Ramesh Shankarlal Bhandari ........Applicant versus Sheventabai Rambhau Sondekar ........Respondent. Mr.R.B. Paranjape i/b J.D. Khairnar adv. for the Applicant. Mr. J.S. Deo adv. for the Respondent. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI,J. DATED : 30th August, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Paranjpe the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Deo the learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This is an application for grant of injunction pending the hearing of the appeal. 3. Undisputedly the order of injunction was operating during the pendency of the suit. 4. Perusal of the order impugned would reveal that though the learned trial judge has held that the plaintiff had proved the agreement for sale and that he had also paid the amount of Rs. 1,03,000/- towards part consideration, the suit has been dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff has failed to get the land measured from the competent authority and publish a notice for getting the 3 clear title of the land. The learned trial court has held that this was required to be done by the plaintiff and not the defendant. 5. Perusal of the agreement between the parties would reveal that according to clause 6, the responsibility to get the land measured is with the vendor and it is the vendor who is required to publish the notice in the news paper. 6. Though Mr. Deo streneously argued that in view of clause 7, the responsibility exists on the defendant, primafacie I am not inclined to accept the said contention. 7. Perusal of clause 7 would reveal that the sale deed is to be executed as far as possible within a period of six months from the date of demarkation and putting the compound. As already discussed hereinabove, there was no demarkation and the steps for demarkation have to be taken by the defendant. In that view of the matter I am inclined to allow the application. 8. Civil Application is therefore allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Needless to say that the amount which is deposited in the trial court by the appellant is directed to be reinvested in fixed deposit. (B. R. GAVAI, J.)