1 PGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICDTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3423 of 2007 IN SUIT NO.3112 OF 1995 Indian Cork Mills Ltd. .. .. Plaintiffs v/s. Chittaranjan Chandrabhan Sharma & ors. .. Defendants Mr.Birendra Saraf i/by Hariani & Co. for Plffs. Mr.Dipen Merchant, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Pankaj Shah for Deft.Nos.4 to 7 & 9 to 11. ---- CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 23rd March, 2010 P.C. : 1.The Plaintiffs claim to be owners of the suit premises. The Plaintiffs have sued since 1995. The Defendants have been injuncted from selling, transferring, alienating, encumbering and creating third party rights in the suit premises. The suit premises is an open land. It is stated to have some stables. The Defendants claim ownership of the suit land. The Defendants have been called upon to produce the documents of title. Though these documents are not served upon the Plaintiffs, they are seen by the Court. The documents relied upon by the Defendants are certain correspondence, record of rights, inquiry register, 2 report of the City Survey Officer and certain proceedings with regard to the land acquisition. 2.The documents produced by the Defendants do not show their title. The title cannot be reflected from the revenue records. The Defendants are shown as claiming party . The assessment records show that there are certain stables. This fact cannot prove ownership of the premises of the Defendants. 3.Though the Defendants have relied upon certain conveyances in their favour, no conveyance or even a copy is produced before the Court. The Defendants have no legal right to claim injunction against the Plaintiffs in the Suit 14 years after it is filed on the premise that they have documents of title. The Notice of Motion is misconceived and hence it is dismissed. 4.Ad-interim order shall be continued for 2 weeks. 5.Copies of the documents produced by the Counsel of the Defendants before the Court are returned. (SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.)