1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 555 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.668 OF 2009 AND APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 563 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 677 OF 2009 Micro Technologies (I) Ltd. .....Appellants Versus Haware Engineers and Builders Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ....Respondents Mr. R. M. Kadam, Advocate-General, Sr. Advocate a/w. Mr. V. Daund, Mr. A. Kamath, Mr. Asher, Mr. V.K.Aggarwal, Mr. J.Jayawant i/b. M/s. Crawford Bayley & Co. for the Appellants. Mr. Atul Rajadhyksha, Senior Counsel for Respondent No.1. Mr. S. U. Kamdar, Senior Counsel i/b. Bhandary & Bhandary Co., Advocates for Respondent No.2 CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 8th JUNE, 2009. P.C. Heard, Mr. Ravi Kadam, Advocate-General for the Appellants, Mr. Rajadhyksha, learned Senior Counsel for Respondent No.1 and Mr. S.U.Kamdar, learned Senior Counsel for Respondent No.2. 2. In my considered view, both the Appeal from Orders can conveniently be disposed of without going into the merits. The Appellants are the original plaintiffs in Special Civil Suit No.487 of 2008. In the aforesaid suit the Appellants/ Original Plaintiffs filed an 2 application at exhibit 43 and 49 against Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 respectively restraining them by an order of temporary injunction from creating third party interest in the suit property till decision of Application at Exhibit - 5. Both the Applications came to be partly allowed and the Respondent No.2 was directed to maintain status-quo as prayed to preserve area i.e. 21,000 sq.ft. out of the total BUA admeasuring 72,600 sq. ft.. 3. It is not disputed that the Appellants had earlier filed an application at Exhibit 5 in said suit for temporary injunction restraining the Respondent No.2 from creating third party interest in the suit property, which is pending. This application, in pursuance of the order dated 11th December, 2008 passed in the Appeal from Order No.701 of 2008 by this Court is to be decided on its own merit. The Applications at Exhibit 43 & 49 came to be filed as Respondent No.2 in pursuance of an advertisement dated 22nd May, 2009 issued in the newspaper started accepting bookings. 4. The Trial Court by the impugned order directed the Respondent No.2 to maintain status-quo only in respect of area of 21,000 of Built Up Area. Both the aforesaid Appeal from Orders were placed for admission on 4th June, 2009 before the Vacation Judge and the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 were injuncted from taking any booking in pursuance of the advertisement issued in newspaper dated 22nd May, 2009 till 8th June, 2009 i.e. today. 5. There is no dispute among the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective parties that the Application at Exhibit-5 filed by the Appellants in their Suit being Special Civil Suit No.487 of 2008 is scheduled for arguments on 9th June, 2009. In view of the fact that the Appellants’ claim for temporary injunction in respect of total BUA 3 admeasuring 72,600 sq. ft. is subjudice before the learned Trial Judge, and the said issue is to be argued on 9th June, 2009, coupled with the fact that by the interim order passed in the above Appeal from Order, the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are directed not to accept bookings in terms of the advertisement dated 22nd May, 2009 till 8th June, 2009 i.e. till today. I dispose of both the Appeal from Orders by passing the following order. 1. The learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane, shall hear the Application at Exhibit 5 in Special Civil Suit No.487 of 2008 on 9th June, 2009 alongwith the application for amendment filed by the Appellants/Original Plaintiffs and pass appropriate order within the period of two weeks thereafter. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective parties assures this Court that they will not claim unnecessary adjournments and that they will co- operate with the learned Trial Judge for disposal of the Application at Exhibit 5 alongwith the Application for amendment. 2. The interim order granted by this Court on 4th June, 2009 is continued for the period of three weeks from today. 3. Needless to mention that the learned Trial Judge shall dispose, the Appellants’ Application at Exhibit 5 alongwith the Application for amendment independently and on its own merit and without being influenced by this order or by the order passed by the Vacation Judge on 4th June, 2009. 4 6. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective parties agrees to communicate this order to the learned Trial Judge. 7. In view of the disposal of the aforesaid Appeal from Orders, the Civil Application Nos. 668 and 677 of 2009 will not survive and therefore the same are disposed of. Sd/- (R. V. MORE, J.)