1 23 caf 3580.10 .doc K IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3580 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2367 OF 2008 Dinesh Ramswaroop Tiwari ..Applicant. Vs. Mrs. Mary Payne & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr.Prashant P. More h/f Mr. S.R.Mishra for the applicant. Ms.Anulata Saundalkar i/b Ms.Gauri Godse for respondent nos.1 and 2. CORAM : K.K.TATED, J. DATED : 06/01/2011. PC: 1 Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2. 2 The present civil application is preferred by original plaintiff for injunction restraining respondents from creating any third party right, title and interest in respect of suit premises i.e. Flat no.G-4 situated at Shradha Co-operative Housing Society Limited at Samarth Ramdas Nagar, Navghar, Vasai (East), District Thane. Applicant filed Special Suit No.193 of 2007 in the court of Civil Judge Senior Division, Vasai for declaration that in view of the execution of release deed dated 25th June, 1998 and declaration dated 25th June, 1998, 2nd May, 2000 and 29th 2 23 caf 3580.10 .doc September, 2000, respondent nos.1 to 3 have no right, title and interest, claim, authority to hold the possession of the suit flat. The said suit was dismissed by trial court on 23rd October, 2008 holding that applicant failed to prove that respondent nos.1 to 3 have no right, title and interest in the suit flat. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant is not in a position to make a statement, whether any interim relief was granted by the trial court during the pendency of the said suit. 3 The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 2 vehemently opposed the present civil application. They filed their reply dated 17th November, 2009. In the said reply they stated that after passing judgment and decree by the trial court the applicant filed the police complaint at Manikpur police station and tried to obtain their signature on some documents. Those facts were recorded by respondent nos. 1 and 2 in the letter dated 1st July, 2009 addressed to the Superintendent of Police. She further submitted that as the suit is already dismissed there is no question of granting any injunction restraining from creating any right, title and interest in respect of suit property. 4 It is admitted fact that suit filed by the applicant is dismissed by the trial court holding that the applicant failed to produce any documentary evidence to show that respondent 3 23 caf 3580.10 .doc nos. 1 to 3 have no right, title and interest in the suit flat. Not only that during the pendency of the suit in trial court there was no injunction restraining respondents from creating any third party right, title and interest in respect of the suit premises. 5 In any case, during the pendency of this first appeal if respondent creates any third party right, title and interest that will be subject to the decision of the present appeal. 6 In view of the above facts, I do not find any reason to allow the present civil application. 7 Civil application dismissed. No order as to costs. (K.K.Tated, J.)