: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.406 OF 2010 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.147 OF 2010 Laxman Mukund Haryan .. Applicant V/s. Bhaskar Ratnushet Haryan & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. G.S. Godbole i/b. Mr. S.R. Ronghel for the Applicant. Mr. N.V. Walawalkar, Sr. Advocate, i/b. Mr. Sudhir Pradhan for Respondent No.1. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED : 20 TH APRIL, 2010. P.C.: 1. Mr. Walawalkar waives service for respondent No.1. 2. This Civil Application has been filed for a stay of the decree passed by the trial Court. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that there was a stay granted by the trial Court which continued even before the Appellate Court. The learned Counsel further submits that the respondents had challenged the interim order passed by the trial : 2 : Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court at the interim stage by filing a Writ Petition in this Court. That Writ Petition was dismissed by this Court by observing that no documents were produced by the respondents herein to support their contentions that they were in possession. 3. However, after evidence was recorded before the trial Court, both the Courts below have concluded that the plaintiff, i.e. the applicant herein, was unable to indicate when possession of the suit property was delivered to him. In these circumstances, when both the Courts below have held categorically that the plaintiff had admitted that he was not actually in possession of the suit property even though the Sale Deed at Exhibit-113 was executed, the question of protecting the plaintiff’s possession of the suit property at this stage does not arise. 4. Therefore, this Civil Application is dismissed. : 3 : 5. The learned Advocate for the applicant seeks continuation of the interim relief which was granted during the pendency of the trial and the Appeal proceedings. 6. Although Mr. Walawalkar opposes this Civil Application, the stay granted earlier shall continue for a period of eight weeks from today.