2102fa1436.09.odt 1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1436 OF 2009 WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 1437 OF 2009 AND CIVIL APPLN. NO. 67 OF 2011 IN F. A. NO. 1436/09 WITH F.A. NO. 1437/09 (Mrs. Kiran w/o Sukumar Nashine Vs. Vivek Ramdas Mokadam) ........................................................................................................................................................................ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ...................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. A. A. Naik, Advocate for the appellants. Respondent – in person. CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 21 FEBRUARY, 2011. 1. Special Civil Suit No. 280 of 2002 filed by the appellant-plaintiff seeking specific performance of the contract has been dismissed by the trial Court on 30/9/2009 essentially on two grounds; (1) that it is barred by limitation, and (2) that it is based upon the agreement for development, which cannot be specifically enforced. 2. Special Civil Suit No. 368 of 2004 filed by the respondent seeking decree for possession of the property has been decreed by the trial court by its judgment and order dated 30/9/2009. Hence, these two appeals are preferred by the original plaintiff in Special Civil Suit No. 280 of 2002. The first appeals being both on the questions of facts and law, the same are required to be admitted. 3. Hence, Admit. 4. Shri V. R. Mokadam, the respondent in person, waives 2102fa1436.09.odt 2/3 service of notice in both these appeals. 5. So far as the question of grant of interim relief is concerned. Shri Mokadam, party in person, submits that his statement was recorded on 17/12/2009 by the Division Bench of this Court that till hearing of the appeal for admission and final disposal, at that stage, he shall not execute the decree under the appeal. He further submits that the learned Counsel for the appellant in both the appeals had made statement before this Court in First Appeal No. 1436/09 that before the next date the appellant shall file private paper book and the appeal can be taken up for final disposal. The no objection of party in person was also recorded on that date for final disposal of the matter. Shri Mokadam submits that in view of both these orders, the first appeals are required to be finally disposed of at the stage of admission. He further submits that paper book has also been filed and the matter is ready for final hearing. He submits that he is also ready with the matter to finally argue the same. However, keeping in view the fact that several first appeals are pending, which are filed prior to these appeals, the present appeals cannot be decided finally at the stage of admission. The matter is required to be gone into on facts as well as on law which will take some time and the matters which are already admitted and pending for final hearing are yet to be decided. Hence, the matter cannot be decided finally at this stage. 6. In view of the fact that the present appeals are admitted, the judgment and decree dated 30/9/2009 passed by the trial Court in Special Civil Suit No. 368/2004 shall remain stayed pending the decision of these appeals. 2102fa1436.09.odt 3/3 7. In view of the above, Civil Application No. 2332/2010 so also, Civil Application No. 3245/2009 in first appeal No. 1436/09 and Civil Application No. 3246 of 2009 in first appeal No. 1437 of 2009 do not survive. C.A. NO. 67/2011 : Shri Mokadam, the respondent in person submits that this application has been filed for imposing conditions upon the appellant in the event the appeals are to be admitted. He submits that he would like to file detailed application proposing therein the terms and conditions while continuing the interim order passed by this Court regarding stay of the judgment and decree passed in Special Civil Suit No. 368 of 2004. Hence, permission is granted to withdraw C. A. No. 67 of 2011 with liberty to file fresh application. JUDGE wwl