1 AO 178-179OF2010 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.178 OF 2010 Trupti Sandeep Mistry .. appellant -versus Siya Estates & Ventures and 3 ors .. Respondents. WITH APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.179 OF 2010. Sandeep Ochhaval Mistry .. appellant versus Siya Estates & Ventures and 3 others .. Respondents. Mr. R.M. Pethe, for the appellants in both the appeals. Mr. Vipin R. Kasle for the respondent Nos 1 and 2 i/b Ram & Co. for the respondent in both the appeals. CORAM: A. S. OKA, J. DATED: 20th April, 2011 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for both the appellants and learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos 1 and 2. 2. First respondent has tendered common affidavit in these appeals which is affirmed on 18th April, 2011. The affidavit is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification. In the affidavit it is disclosed that leave and license agreement has been executed by the first respondent on 5th April, 2010 in favour of Tata Asset Management Ltd. A copy of the leave 2 AO 178-179OF2010 and license agreement has been annexed to the agreement. 3. In the affidavit tendered today, first respondent has stated thus : “However, I (respondent No.1 above named) hereby undertake to this Hon’ble Court that respondent No.1 will not create any further 3rd party rights in respect of the aforesaid office no.33 on 3rd floor of the building known as “Yeshwant” situated at C.T.S. No. 38 /10B and F.P. No.37/10B on the main Prabhat Road, Pune 4 till disposal of the suit nos 1751 and 1752 of 2007 pending in the court of the learned Civil Judge Senior Division at Pune. I further undertake on behalf of respondent No.1 that upon termination of the aforesaid leave and license agreement dated 5th April, 2010 and/or handing over possession of the said premises by licensee to respondent no.1 whichever is earlier, respondent no.1 shall not part with possession and/or create any third party rights in respect of the said property till disposal of the suit”. 4. The aforesaid undertakings are accepted. Pending the suit, the aforesaid undertakings will sufficiently protect the interests of both the appellants. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants expressed apprehension that in the event appellants succeed in obtaining decree for possession, leave and license agreement will come in the way of execution. There is no basis for the said apprehension as the leave and license Agreement has been executed during the pendency of the suit. In view of the aforesaid undertakings, it is not 3 AO 178-179OF2010 necessary to entertain the appeals which are directed against interim orders passed by the trial Court. It is obvious that the findings recorded in the impugned orders are tentative findings and the trial Court will not be influenced by the same at the time of final disposal of the suits. 5. Subject to what is observed above, appeals are disposed of. 6. Hearing of the suits is expedited and the trial Court shall make an endeavour to complete the hearing before end of this year. 7. Civil Application No.245 of 2010 in AO No.178 of 2010 and Civil Application No.246 of 2010 in AO No.179 of 2010 do not survive and the same are disposed of accordingly. (A. S. OKA, J.)