: 1 : SD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1410 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1410 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1410 OF 2007 IN IN IN SECOND APPEAL NO.754 OF 2007 SECOND APPEAL NO.754 OF 2007 SECOND APPEAL NO.754 OF 2007 Jagjitsingh Darshansingh Anand, Deceased, . Thru’ Indrajitkaur J. Anand & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Manjitsingh Baldevsingh Kohali ...Respondent Mr.Shriram S. Kulkarni, Advocate, for the Applicants. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATE : 25TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATE : 25TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATE : 25TH FEBRUARY, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Advocate appearing for the applicants. The applicants are the original plaintiffs. Money decree was passed by the Trial Court in favour of the applicants. The said decree has been set aside in an Appeal preferred by the respondent. 2. During the pendency of the Appeal in the District Court, the respondent had deposited a sum of Rs.75,000/- towards the decretal amount. It is pointed out that the said amount was invested under the orders of the District Court. Submission of the Advocate for the applicants is that as the Second Appeal is admitted for final hearing, the respondent : 2 : should be restrained from withdrawing the said amount and investment of the said amount be continued. It is submitted that in case the applicants succeed in the Appeal, the said amount can be appropriated towards the decree. 3. The suit filed by the applicants has been dismissed by the impugned Judgment and Decree. Therefore, the respondent cannot be restrained from withdrawing the amount which he had deposited on the basis of a decree which has been set aside. 4. Hence, there is no merit in the Application and the same is rejected. [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]