SM 1 caf.4072.06.gr IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4072 OF 2006 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 317 OF 2003 M/s. Bombay Fiber Industries Ltd. .... Applicant Versus Hind Dyes Manufacturing Co. (P). Ltd. .... Respondent ______________ Shri. Vijay Thorat, Sr. Advocate a/w Dr. Ranjit Thorat and Pradeep Thorat and R. K. Satpalkar i/b Mulla & Mulla for the Applicant (original respondent). Shri. Aspi Chinoy, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vachan Bodke, Chitnis Vaithy & Co. for the Respondent (original Appellant). CORAM: A. M. KHANWILKAR AND R. Y. GANOO, JJ. DATE: JUNE 9, 2011. P.C.: 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. It is not in dispute that the Appeal is already admitted. In so far as prayer clause (a) is concerned, it is opposed by the Counsel for the Respondent. In deference to the observations SM 2 caf.4072.06.gr made by the Court. Mr. Thorat submits that the applicant would be content with the order in terms of prayer clause (b) of the application, which reads thus: “(b): Pending the hearing and final disposal of the First Appeal No.839 of 2002and First Appeal No.317 of 2003, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to restrict and/or prevent the Respondents by an order and injunction from in any manner taking steps for development of the said property or any part thereof including getting the plans sanctioned from the local authorities, getting their “no objection” for the development, making applications for the change of user etc in any manner whatsoever.” In addition, Mr. Thorat submits that the respondent/appellant be directed not be create third party interests in the suit property. 3. Counsel for the respondent / appellant has no objection for granting this limited prayer as sought by the applicant as referred to above. 4. Accordingly, the application is partly allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) with further injunction against the respondent / appellant not to create third party interests in the disputed property SM 3 caf.4072.06.gr during the pendency of the appeal. 5. Request for early hearing may be renewed after some time. The same will be considered appropriately. 6. Application disposed of in the above terms. (R. Y. GANOO, J.) (A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.)