1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.529 OF 2009 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.82 OF 2000 Bhagu Vithu Kharat .... Applicant Vs. Shri Bapu Rongu @ Rongu-Patkare .... Respondents & Ors. Mr. Datta Pawar i/by M/s Khandeparkar & Associates for applicant. Mr. Devidas Keluskar h/for Mr.G.H. Keluskar, Advocate for respondent no.1. Coram : SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. Date : 1st July, 2009 P.C. 1. This application is taken out by original respondent no.2 for an interim injunction against the respondent No.1 to the civil application who is original appellant and original respondents no.1, 3 to 13. The prayer in the Civil Application is to seek an interim injunction against the respondents restraining them inter alia from creating third party right over the suit property. During the submissions, the learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant seeks the relief of injunction only against respondent no.1 to the application who is original appellant and not the other respondents. 2. The averments made in support of the reliefs sought in the Civil Application are found at paragraph 4. The applicant baldly alleges that respondents are trying to sell the “suit property i.e. survey No. 2 221/B-1”. The details and particulars of the allegations are missing. Also the description of the suit property is incorrect. Perusal of the appeal shows that the property in question is survey no.221/B-1 and survey No.216/B-1. It is next alleged that respondents are also obstructing the applicant and his family members from entering into the suit premises. These are also the bald allegations. Thus, there is no substance whatsoever in the allegations made. Therefore, the Civil Application is dismissed. (Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota,J)