: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST.) NO.13496 OF 2008 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4152 OF 2006 IN S.C. SUIT NO.4585 OF 2006 Smt.Kusumlata Vijay Singh ..Appellant. Vs. Mr.Subhash Vijay Singh & Anr. ..Respondent. Mr.R.S.Yadav for the Appellant. Mr.Chetan Agarwal for the Respondent. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 12TH JUNE, 2008 DATED : 12TH JUNE, 2008 DATED : 12TH JUNE, 2008 P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : 1. I am not inclined to interfere with the judgment of the learned Judge which has dealt with all the facts in considerable detail. The findings, specially the one disbelieving the marriage of the Appellant with the father of the Respondent cannot be said to be perverse. 2. From the order refusing the ad-interim reliefs, an Appeal from Order was filed earlier in which an injunction was granted in favour of the Appellant. That order was ultimately set aside by the Supreme Court. : 2 : 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent further states that the Respondents do not intend selling or disposing of the residential house atleast at present and that they shall not do so without giving notice in writing of atleast four weeks to the Appellant’s Advocate in the trial Court. The statement is accepted. 4. Even assuming the Appellant had any right, it is only to the extent of one fourth of the estate. 4. Subject to the above, the Appeal from Order is dismissed. 5. The Appellant is at liberty to make an application for expedition before the trial Court. The trial Judge to accord to the matter the urgency that it may deserve considering the pendency in his Court. ***