1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Second Appeal No.330/2006 ( Jagnnath Devi Pande through L.Rs. & another ..V/s.. Jagdeorao Tidke & others ) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. V.S. Bapat, counsel for the appellant. Mr. V.M. Deshpande, counsel for the respondents. Coram : F.M.REIS, J. Dated : 17th February 2010. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents. Admit on the following substantial question of law - 1. Whether the lower Appellate Court has misconstrued the agreement for sale dated 16/11/1981 in coming to the conclusion that the specific performance could be granted in favour of the respondent when as per record, the area agreed to be sold was not allotted to the appellant in any partition proceedings and as such the appellants were not entitled to execute the said sale deed ? 2. Whether the lower Appellate Court has 2 misconstrued the provisions of the Sections 8 and 14 of the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 in coming to the conclusion that no fragment will be carved out in case the specific performance of the agreement is granted ? C.A. No.3029/2006. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the respondents. This is an application for stay to the impugned judgment and decree dated 3/2/2006 passed in favour of the respondent by the learned District Judge. Ahcalpur in Regular Civil Appeal No.90/2000. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned judgment and decree dated 3/2/2006 is stayed subject to the appellants, their servants and agents being restrained from creating any third party right in the suit property or putting any construction whatsoever therein during the pendency of the appeal. Judge. Tambaskar.