1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. APPEAL NO.334 OF 2005 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3185 OF 2004 IN SUIT NO.3121 OF 2004 WITH CROSS APPEAL (L) NO.4 OF 2005 Gopal L. Raheja & Anr. ...Appellants. Vs. Vijay B. Raheja & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Shri Aspi Chinoy, Senior Advocate with Shri Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate, Shri P.K. Samdani, Senior Advocate, S/Shri P. K. Shroff and Subodh Joshi and Ms. Radhika Kalpatrai i/b. Parimal K. Shroff & Co. for the Appellants. Shri N. H. Seervai i/b. J. Sagar & Associates for Respondent Nos.1 to 4. Shri I.M. Chagla, Senior Advocate with S/Shri L.C. Pereira and S.V. Doijode and Ms. Meenakshi Iyer i/b. M/s. Doijode Associates for Respondent Nos.5 and 7. Shri D.J. Khambatta, Senior Advocate i/b. M/s. Raval Shah & Co. for Respondent No.8. Shri M.S. Doctor i/b. S.R. Rawell & Co. for Respondent No.9. ..... CORAM : R. M. S.KHANDEPARKAR & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, JJ. April 25, 2007. P.C. On pronouncement of the judgment, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants prayed for continuation of the ad- interim relief which was in force in the appeal. We have delivered 2 a reasoned judgment and all the points have been discussed and decided in the judgment. In the circumstances, we do not find any justification for continuation of the ad-interim relief which was granted earlier. The request for continuation of the ad-interim relief, therefore, is rejected. ( R. M. S.KHANDEPARKAR, J.) ( DR.D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.)