1 caa433 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.433 OF 2011 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.299 OF 2011 Vikas Hanumant Phalke & Anr. ...Applicants vs. Ananta Rambhau Tidke & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.J.M.Chodankar for the applicants Mr.S.S.Redekar for the respondents CORAM : A.S.OKA,J. DATE : APRIL 11,2011 P.C.: 1 Heard learned counsel for the parties. In the plaint, the respondents have admitted that the suit premises stand in the name of the present appellants. The suit is not filed by the respondents on behalf of the villagers in the representative capacity. Prima facie, it appears that the appellants are not signatories to document at Exh.C annexed to the plaint. Prima facie, it appears to me from the averments made in the plaint that the respondents-plaintiffs have no exclusive right in the suit property which admittedly stands in the name of the appellants. Looking to the frame of the suit, temporary injunction which purports to protect alleged possession of the respondents could not have been granted. Hence, a case is made out for grant of stay. However, a drastic relief of appointment of Court Receiver cannot be granted at this stage. 2 Hence application is disposed of by passing the following order : . There will be interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a). Prayer (b) is rejected. JUDGE