1 caa795.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Civil Application No. 795 of 2011 IN Appeal from Order No.573 of 2011 Smt. Archana Anilkumar Kasture & ors. ....Applicants v/s. Smt. Bharti Trambak Chaudhary ....Respondent Mr. Balkrishna P. Joshi for the applicants. Mr. Ajay S. Patil for the respondent. CORAM: R.M. BORDE, J. 16th December, 2011 PC: The trial Court has granted application seeking temporary injunction and restrained the defendants from causing obstruction to the possession of the plaintiffs and dis-possessing him without following due process of law. This is a gross case wherein interim-relief ought to be granted directing stay of the impugned order for the reason that the basis on which the plaintiff claims his entitlement is an oral agreement for purchase of the residential premises. 2. The plaintiff claims that he has agreed to purchase the property for consideration of Rs. 7 lacs and out of which the amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- has been paid. There is no evidence put on record in respect of payment of Rs. 2,50,000/-. The amount is stated to have been paid in cash. It is the case of the defendants that some third party was entrusted with the job of looking after the vacant premises and through whom the plaintiff has entered into the suit premises. The theory put up by the plaintiff in respect of his oral agreement of sale is not believable. Moreover, there is no evidence in respect of passing of 2 caa795.11.sxw consideration. The order passed by the trial Court does not prima-facie appears to be sustainable. 3. Hence, interim-relief in terms of prayer clause (a). The Counsel appearing for respondent-original plaintiff requests for grant of stay of this order for further period of six weeks. Oral request made stands rejected. (R.M.BORDE, J)