1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2951 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO. 1788 OF 2009 Rajbali Bhogoti Kohar and 2 Ors. ..Plaintiffs Vs. Ashok Bhagelu Prajapati and 4 others ..Defendants .... Bharat Joshi along with Mehul Shah for Plaintiffs Sunil Singh for Defendant Nos. 1 and 2. .... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 8th /9th DECEMBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. The Plaintiffs have approached this Court claiming a declaration. The Plaintiffs have claimed declaration that they are lawful and absolute owners of the property which is more particularly described in the schedule Annexure-A to the plaint. It is common 2 ground that the premises/property include Room Nos.2 and 3 admeasuring 400 sq. feet. These rooms are stated to be in possession of Defendant Nos.1 to 3. 2. The Plaintiffs claim on the basis that one Sumaribai was original owner of the suit properties. She had no issues but left behind her two step daughters Sulshibai and Fulsibai. The husband of Sumaribai died in March, 1944 whereas Sumaribai had expired in 1997. The Plaintiffs claim to be sons of one of the step daughters of Sumaribai. It is their case that they are her sons and legal heirs. 3. The Plaintiffs ’ case is that their father had preferred a suit for similar reliefs and declaration. It was during the course of the interim proceedings in the said suit that the Defendant Nos.1 to 3 in the present suit disclosed that they have already entered into an M.O.U. dated 11th June, 2008 with Defendant Nos.4 and 5 to sell the suit property. 4. It is in these circumstances and when parties are governed by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 that the instant suit is filed for declaration and other reliefs. 5. It is stated that the suit property is a valuable immovable property 3 consisting of structures and open land. The Defendant Nos.1 to 3 are occupying Room Nos. 3 and 4 admeasuring 400 sq. ft. and the rest of the land is occupied by structures. The open land is nothing but passages and open spaces between the structures. Apart from these rooms, the other structures/rooms are in possession of tenants and Defendant Nos.1 to 3 are recovering rent/compensation from them. 6. It is stated that both Defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 4 and 5 have been duly served. 7. I have heard Shri. Joshi appearing on behalf of Plaintiffs and Shri. Singh appearing on behalf of Defendant Nos.1 to 3. There is no affidavit in reply by Defendant Nos. 4 and 5. They are duly served. 8. After the Motion was argued for sometime, Plaintiffs and Defendant Nos.1 to 3 agree that without prejudice to their rights and contentions, the following interim order would serve the ends of justice: (i) During the pendency of the suit, there will be an interim injunction restraining the Defendants from transferring or disposing off the suit property or any part thereof so also from 4 creating further tenancies in respect of the rooms/structures on the same. However, this will not prevent the Defendant Nos.1 to 3 from recovering rent in respect of structures/rooms but they shall maintain complete accounts of the same till hearing and final disposal of the suit. (ii) Motion is made absolute in these terms with no order as to costs. S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.