1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 240 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 318 OF 2010 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. OF 2010 IN B.C.C. L. C. SUIT NO. 484 OF 2010 Ulhas Pandharinath Vernekar & Ors. ... Appellants (Orig. Plaintiffs) Vs. Mohd. Shaikh & Ors. ... Respondents (Org.defendants) Mr. V.Y.Sanglikar i/b. Mr. D.R.Shah, advocates, for the appellants. Mr. R.K.Agrawal, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Smt. K.K.Saran, Advocate, for respondent No.4 BMC. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 15th March , 2010. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The Appeal is preferred against the refusal of ad-interim relief while the Notice of Motion is still pending. It appears that the respondents/defendants Nos. 1 to 3 have not even filed reply to the Notice of Motion. In my considered 2 opinion, the following order will meet the ends of justice :- 3. The respondents shall file reply to the Notice of Motion within one week from this day and the trial Court shall hear and dispose of the Notice of Motion within three weeks thereafter. Pending disposal of the Notice of Motion, the parties shall maintain status quo. The Appeal stands disposed of. 4. As the Appeal itself is disposed of, C.A. No.318 of 2010 does not survive and stands disposed of accordingly. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)