1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 392 OF 2007 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.248 OF 2006 IN SUIT NO.1320 OF 2004 Santosh Gopichand Rane .... Appellant Vs. MHADA & Ors. .... Respondents Mr Rakesh Kumar with Ms. Soni Kumari i/by Legal Vision for appellant. W. Mattos, AGP for respondents no. 1 to 3 Shashipal Shankar, respondent no.9. Coram : D.K. Deshmukh & Smt.R.P. SondurBaldota, JJ. Date : 24th June, 2010 P.C. : 1. The learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff-appellant and respondent nos. 1,2 and 3 i.e. MHADA and it s officers state that ’ this appeal should be disposed of by continuing the operation of interim order dated 11th June 2007 passed in Notice of Motion No. 2287 of 2007 which was filed in this appeal during 2 the pendency of the suit. In view of this statement, it is directed that during the pendency of Suit No.1320 of 2004, interim order in terms of prayer clause (b) of Notice of Motion No.2287 of 2007 shall operate. 2. However, the plaintiff shall not be entitled to claim any equity at the final hearing of the suit because of the operation of the interim order. In case there is a change in the policy in relation to the cable operators, by respondent nos. 1,2 and 3 shall be at liberty to apply before the learned Single Judge for cancellation or modification of the interim order. In case such an application is made by the respondent nos. 1,2 and 3, it shall be considered on its own merits by the learned Single Judge without being influenced by the order passed in this appeal. The appeal is disposed of. (Smt.R.P .SondurBaldota,J) (D.K.Deshmukh, J.)