1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.698 OF 2010 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.161 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.776 OF 2009 IN S.C.SUIT NO.2960 OF 1990 Shri Vilas Kedari Nikam )..Applicant Vs. Shri Rajnikant Appaji Shinde )..Respondent ---- Mr. M.V. Holamagi for the applicant. Mr. D. M. Joshi for the respondent. ---- Coram : R.S.MOHITE,J Date : 24th February, 2010 PC 1 By this Civil Application the applicant seeks a stay of operation of the judgment and order passed on 18.12.2009 in First Appeal No.776/2009. It is seen that when the First Appeal was disposed off by a judgment and order dated 18.12.2009, no prayer for stay of the operation of the said judgment and order was made. Subsequently, Civil Application bearing Civil Application No.161/2010 came to be filed on 11.1.2010 seeking a stay of the operation of the order dated 18.12.2009. In this Civil Application, on 21.1.2010, this Court directed the appellant to deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/- within one week and granted a stay for a period of one week. Subsequently on 28.1.2010 in view of the fact that Rs. 50,000 had been deposited, this Court stayed the operation of a decree for a further period 2 of two weeks. 2 That subsequent to the passing of the order the applicant filed LPA impugning the main judgment and order dated 18.12.2009. Along with the said LPA the applicant filed C.A.No.48/2010 for stay of the impugned order. On 17.2.2010 the Division Bench passed an order allowing the Advocate to withdraw the appeal and dismissed the LPA as such. The Division Bench further passed an order that in view of the dismissal of the LPA, nothing survived in the Civil Application and Civil Application for stay was also dismissed. 3 Subsequently, the present Civil Application has been filed for the same reliefs as sought in C.A.No.161/2010 and C.A.No.48/2010 as filed in the LPA. In my view, once the main judgment and order has been challenged before the Division Bench and the appeal has been withdrawn and no relief has been continued by the Division Bench, it would not be proper for the single Judge to grant the same relief. Hence, application is rejected. The applicant states that he would like to move the Division Bench. He is always at liberty to do so if he so desires. Application stands disposed off accordingly. (R.S.MOHITE,J) 3 4