: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3192 OF 2009 Cynthia Savio Pereira ... Petitioner V/s. The Ruki Mahal C.H.S. Ltd. ... Respondent Chandrakant Chavan for Petitioner Mr.N.K. Mudnaney for Respondent No.7 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 17TH JUNE, 2009 P. C.: 1. The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the order passed in the Appeal preferred by the society against the order passed by the trial Court on 21.11.2008 By that order, the trial Court had directed the respondent society to open the gate which was in front of the petitioner’s shop which had been closed by the Society since 18.9.2007. This was an order passed by way of interim relief. The society being aggrieved by that order challenged the same in the appeal preferred before the cooperative appellate Court. 2. The case of the Petitioner is that pursuant to a resolution which was passed by the society at the behest of one Mahesh Dhanani, the gate infront of the petitioner’s shop had been closed down since 18.9.2007. She, therefore, filed a dispute before the cooperative Court seeking a declaration that the resolution was : 2 : null and void and further that the northwest gate of the building should be reopened and her ingress and egress to the shop purchased by her from that gate should not be obstructed. 3. In my opinion, there is no need to interfere with the order passed by the appellate Court as it has for appropriate reasons held such a relief could not have been granted at the interim stage. It is true that the final relief can be granted in certain cases when extreme hardship is caused. However, the Supreme Court has consistently held that a party cannot be given the final relief at an interlocutory stage. In view of this, the appellate Court cannot be faulted for concluding that the order passed by the trial Court must be reversed. Besides the petitioner can have access to her shop through the other gates although they are not exactly in front of the shop. Her business therefore can continue as before during the pedency of the trial. 4. Petition rejected. However, the trial Court shall decide the dispute pending before it expeditiously.