1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.706/2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.819/2008 Mrs.Leena Rogers Nunes. ..Appellant -VERSUS- Mr.Lloyd Casmer Ver and others. ..Respondents. .......... Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar, Senior Advocate i/b Mr.Amol A. Mhatre, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr.Ajit Salvi, Advocate h/f Mr.Sandesh Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No.1. Mr.Mahesh Menon, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. Mr.N.R.Bubna, Advocate for the Respnodent No.3. Mr.K.S.Dewal, Advocate for the Respnodents No.4 to 6. .......... CORAM : R.V.MORE, J. DATED : 15th APRIL, 2009. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. This appeal is filed against the order dated 23.05.2008 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane dismissing the Appellant' s application below Exhibit-5 in Special Civil Suit No.654/2006 claiming temporary injunction restraining the Respondents Nos.1 and 2 from 2 alienating or creating third party interest in the suit property bearing Survey No.87/5 admeasuring 1435 Sq.Yard. 3. The Appellant and the predecessor in title of the Respondents Nos.4 to 6 are the sisters of the Respondent No.1. They have executed the power of attorney on 12.10.1998 in favour of the Respondent No.1 authorizing him to sale or transfer all the immovable properties. The Respondent No.1 in turn entered into a development agreement with the Respondent No.2 on 29.10.2001. The Respondent No.2, thereafter, issued a public notice on 04.12.2002 and got plan sanctioned from the Respondent No.3 Municipal Corporation in the year 2002. The construction of building is already completed and third party interest has already been created. Though the public notice was given by the Respondent No.2 on 04.12.2002, the Appellant never objected the transaction between the Respondents Nos.1 and 2 till filing of the suit on 14.11.2006. The Appellant has also amended the suit on 07.02.2008 and has claimed mandatory compensation. The development agreement is also signed by the predecessor in title of the Respondents Nos.4 to 6. 4. Mr.Dhakephalkar, learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant submits that the alleged power of attorney dated 12.10.1998 is not registered and therefore, no rights can be claimed by the Respondent No.1 on the basis of the said power of attorney. This submission, in my view, can be considered at the time of hearing of the suit inasmuch as the construction of building is already completed and third party rights 3 are already created. 5. Mr.Dhakephalkar, lastly submitted that the entire construction is not completed and the Respondent No.2 proposes to commence fresh construction. The learned counsel for the Respondent No.2, however, denied this submission and submitted that the entire construction is completed and the Respondent No.2 does not proposes to initiate new construction. 6. Taking overall view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the appeal so as to enable me to interfere in the impugned order. Accordingly, the Appeal From Order is dismissed. In view of dismissal of the appeal, Civil Application does not survive and the same is also disposed of. 7. At this stage, Mr.Dhakephalkar, learned Senior Counsel submits that interim order granted by this Court may be continued for a further period of four weeks from today in order to approach the Apex Court. 8. The learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 opposes the prayer. 9. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, interim order granted by this Court is continued for a further period of four weeks from today. 10. The appeal is dismissed. JUDGE