1 94 ao.1126.10 ndm FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1126 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr. H.S.Anand i/b Mrs. Sarita Donde for the Appellant. Ms. Prachi Khandge i/b M/s.P.M.Vashi and Associates for the Respondent. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 01 st March, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant – original plaintiff. 2 The plaintiff had prayed for three reliefs in the notice of motion. The notice of motion has been made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) and rest of the reliefs are not granted. 3 In paragraph No.7 of the impugned order, the learned trial Judge has observed thus. “7. At the outset, it is required to be mentioned that although the plaintiff has claimed three reliefs in the Notice of Motion, the submissions advanced on behalf of the plaintiff are restricted to the extent of creating third party interest on the suit property. Other two reliefs mainly relate to the compensation amount and therefore, in my opinion, same cannot be 2 94 ao.1126.10 considered while disposing of the Notice of Motion.” 4 What is recorded in paragraph No.7 of the impugned order indicates that the submissions were made before the learned trial Judge only on the prayer clause (a) of the notice of motion, which has been granted. 5 Hence, no case is made out for interference with the discretionary and equitable order passed by the trial Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with not order as to costs. Hearing of the suit is expedited. [ A.S.OKA, J ]