1 ca7623.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7623 OF 2011 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 144 OF 2008 Faheem Press s/o Khajabhai, Age: 42 years, Occ: Business, Near Natraj Rangmandir, Parli, Tq. Parli, Dist. Beed. ...APPLICANT VERSUS Fate Mohammad s/o Jan Mohammad Raj, Age: 60 years, Occ: Service, R/o. Parli-V. Tq. Parli-V, Dist. Beed. ...RESPONDENT WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7624 OF 2011 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 6 OF 2009 Khajabhai s/o. Kadar Maniyar, Age: 40 years, Occ: Business, Near Natraj Rangmandir, Parli, Tq. Parli, Dist. Beed. ...APPLICANT VERSUS Fate Mohammad s/o Jan Mohammad Raj, Age: 60 years, Occ: Service, R/o. Parli-V. Tq. Parli-V, Dist. Beed. ...RESPONDENT 2 ca7623.11 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7625 OF 2011 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 145 OF 2008 Mubarak s/o Abbas Ali, Age: 45 years, Occ: Business, Near Natraj Rangmandir, Parli-V, Tq. Parli-V, Dist. Beed. ...APPLICANT VERSUS Fate Mohammad s/o Jan Mohammad Raj, Age: 60 years, Occ: Service, R/o. Parli-V. Tq. Parli-V, Dist. Beed. ...RESPONDENT WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7632 OF 2011 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 152 OF 2008 Kalimkhan s/o Rahimkhan, Age: 42 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Parli-Vaijinath, Tq. Parli, Dist. Beed and another. ...APPLICANTS VERSUS Fate Mohammad s/o Jan Mohammad Raj, Age: 62 years, Occ: Service, R/o. Natraj Rang Mandir, Parli-Vaijinath, Tal. Parli, District Beed. ...RESPONDENT ... Mr. G.R. Syed, Advocate for applicants. Mr. L.V. Sangit, Advocate for respondent. ... 3 ca7623.11 CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 1ST AUGUST, 2011 PER COURT : Heard learned Counsel appearing for the applicants and learned Counsel appearing for respondent. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicants submits that, though notice of execution was not served upon the applicants, direct possession warrant came to be issued. Learned Counsel invited my attention to the order dated 22-07-2009 passed by this Court in which this Court permitted the applicants to deposit the arrears of rent amount. It is further submitted that, Civil Revision Application No. 141 of 2005 filed by respondent was directed to be heard first, whenever, such Civil Revision Application is listed for final hearing, Counsel for 4 ca7623.11 respondent is not arguing the said Civil Revision Application. Learned Counsel further invited my attention to the order dated 27-01-2011 wherein this Court observed that, Civil Revision Application should be heard finally and while hearing all Civil Revision Applications, Civil Revision Application No. 141 of 2005 will be heard first. Said Civil Revision Application is filed by respondent herein. He further submits that, there is no objection by the applicants for withdrawal of the amount deposited in this Court subject to outcome of the Civil Revision Applications. Learned Counsel further submits that, the applicants are not in arrears towards rent amount. 3. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for respondent herein submits that, prayers in these Civil Applications itself are defective and those prayers cannot be granted. He further submits that, though the specific directions are given by this Court by order dated 5 ca7623.11 22-07-2009 to the applicants to pay the rent amount, no steps were taken till possession warrant was issued to the applicants. It is further submitted that this is 4th time when this Court is granting liberty to the applicants to deposit the rent amount. It is further submitted that, at the time of admitting Civil Revision Applications, no prayer for interim relief was entertained. Therefore, it should be presumed that this Court has refused the prayer for interim relief. Learned Counsel further submits that, though notices in the execution proceedings are served on the applicants herein, they have not appeared in the execution petition. Therefore, learned Counsel for respondent herein would submit that, this Court may not grant any interim relief. 4. It is not in dispute that now by order dated 21-07-2011 Registry is directed to place all these Civil Revision Applications for final hearing on 29-08-2011. From the perusal of 6 ca7623.11 earlier order, there is no any interim relief granted in favour of the applicants. However, since this Court has admitted Civil Revision Applications and is not able to take up these matters for final hearing in spite of fixing the same for final hearing, in my opinion, since Civil Revision Applications are admitted, till next date of hearing i.e. 29-08-2011 the applicants are required to be protected. This Court on 01-07-2011 granted status quo. Same order to continue till 29-08-2011. However, it is made clear that this order is passed till 29-08-2011 and automatically it will cease to operate on that date. If respondent herein wish to withdraw the amount deposited in this Court, he is permitted to withdraw the same subject to filing undertaking that in case, the Civil Revision Applications are decided against him, he will bring that money to this Court. It is needless to mention that the applicants should continue to deposit the rent amount. 7 ca7623.11 . It is made clear that the status quo order will operate till 29-08-2011. 5. Civil Applications are disposed of. [S.S. SHINDE, J.] sut/AUG11