1 caf2327-11 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2327 OF 2011 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.605 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 205 OF 2008 Satish Rajaram Patil .. Applicant V/s. Appasaheb Govind Tate & Anr. .. Respondents ..... Mr. Sagar Mane i/b. Mr. N. V. Bandiwadekar for the applicant. Mr. Amit Borkar for respondent No.1. Mr. G. M. Savagave for respondent No.2. ..... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : OCTOBER 12, 2011. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent. This is an application for vacating the interim relief granted by this Court on 8th February, 2008. 2. By the order dated 8th February, 2008, the execution of the decree for specific performances passed by the trial Court was stayed on the application made by the first respondent in this application, subject to condition that the first respondent shall not 2 caf2327-11 create any third party interests in respect of the suit property and shall not part with possession of the suit property. 3. Allegation in the application is that in breach of the condition imposed while granting stay, the first respondent has executed agreement for sale dated 21st January, 2011 in favour of one Swarup Mahadevrao Mahadik and that he has also executed an agreement dated 20th January, 2011 for sale in favour of the same purchaser. 4. The first respondent has filed affidavit dated 4th October, 2011 of the purchaser under the agreements. In the said affidavit it is stated thus: “ I say that I had executed Agreement for sale dated 21.1.2011 with Shri Appasaheb Govindrao Tate in respect of 3 Acre 20 Are land out of total 4 Hector 23 Are of Hissa No.1 Gat No.48 at Mouje Ichalkaranji, Tal.­ Hatkanangale, Dist. Kolhapur. I say that aforesaid agreement for sale dated 21.1.2011 which is notarized document is cancelled by me and Shri Appasaheb Govindrao Tate by Cancellation Deed dated 15.8.2011. I say that registered Agreement for Sale dated 20.1.2011 I shall not claim any right, title and interest in the suit property.” 5. The cancellation deed referred to therein has been annexed to the reply filed by the first respondent. 6. Both the first respondent and the purchaser under the 3 caf2327-11 agreement for sale dated 20th January, 2011 have stated on oath that the said agreement does not relate to the suit property and on the basis of the said agreement of sale, the purchaser shall not claim any right, title or interest in the suit property. As far as agreement of sale dated 21st January, 2011 is concerned, the same has been cancelled by a written document as stated in the affidavit of the purchaser. 7. The statements made in the affidavit of the purchaser dated 4th October, 2011 will have to be accepted and the same are accordingly accepted. In view of what is stated in the affidavit­in­ reply of the first respondent and the affidavit of the purchaser, no case is made out for vacating the interim relief. 8. However, the fact remains that the first respondent has executed an agreement for sale dated 21st January, 2011 relating to the suit property and, therefore, the applicant was forced to file the present application. The applicant was required to incur cost of filing the present application. Moreover, at least one of the two agreements was in breach of the condition imposed by this Court while granting the stay. Therefore, the first respondent will have to be pay costs quantified at Rs.15,000/­. 9. Hence, I pass the following order: 4 caf2327-11 :: O R D E R :: i. The statement made in the affidavit­in­reply of the first respondent and the affidavit dated 4th October, 2011 filed by Mr. Swarup Mahadevrao Mahadik are accepted. ii. In view of the said statements, the prayer for vacating the interim relief is rejected. iii. The first respondent shall pay costs of Rs.15,000/­ to the applicant within a period of six weeks from today. (A.S.OKA, J.)