1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.83 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.105 OF 2009 ALONG WITH APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.84 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.106 OF 2009 ALONG WITH APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.85 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.107 OF 2009 M/s. A A Estates Private Limited : Appellants versus Sunder Nagar Samadhan Co-op. Housing Society Ltd and ors. : Respondents. ALONG WITH APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.86 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.108 OF 2009 M/s.A A Estates Private Limited : Appellants. Versus Nirlon Karmachari Co-op. Housing Society Ltd and ors. : Respondents. Shri S B Prabhavalkar for the Appellants. Shri Sean Wassoodew for the Respondent Nos.3, 4 and 6 2 CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 12, 2009 P.C. 1. The above Appeals challenge the orders dated 22nd December 2008 passed by the learned Judge City Civil Court, Mumbai by which orders the Notice of Motions filed by each of the contesting Respondents to each of the above Appeals who are the members of the Respondent No.1 Society came to be allowed in terms of the prayer clauses (a) and (b) which prayers are identical in all the Notice of Motions. The said prayers are reproduced herein under :- (a) Pending the hearing and the final disposal of the suit for mandatory orders and injunctions of this Hon'ble Court, thereby directing the Plaintiff to execute in favour of the Defendant No.4 the legal, proper and valid agreement as required under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats 3 Act, read with the Development Agreement dated 10.8.2004 and Supplementary Agreement dated 9.1.2007 in respect of the permanent alternative accommodation undertaken to be provided i.e. In respect of the flat, duly sanctioned by the competent authorities to have carpet area of 345 sq. feet plus 75 sq.feet in the new building to be constructed on the suit plot; (b) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit for mandatory orders and injunctions of this Hon'ble Court, thereby directing the Plaintiff to provide to the Defendant No.4, the Compensation at the rate as is provided for in the Development Agreement dated 10.8.2004 and Supplementary Agreement dated 9.1.2007 in respect of the temporary accommodation required to be acquired by the Defendant No.4 pending the construction of the new building to be construed on the suit plot. 2. The learned counsel for the parties raised various contentions in support and against the impugned orders. However, after hearing the above Appeals for some time, both the learned 4 counsel submitted that in view of the nature of the order that is to be passed, no reasons are necessary to be recorded for the same. Hence the following order :- :ORDER: (i) The Appellant who is developing the property in question is directed to execute an Agreement with the contesting Respondents herein in each of the Appeals as contemplated in Clause 39 of the Development Agreement dated 10th August 2004. The Contesting Respondents in each of the Appeals would cooperate with the Appellant in executing the said Agreement. The said Agreement to be executed within a period of eight weeks from date. (ii) In so far as payment of compensation is concerned, the Appellant would pay the compensation in terms of the orders passed by the learned Judge R B Malik and the learned Judge S B Bhale of the City Civil Court, Mumbai, since the said orders have been 5 confirmed right up to the Apex Court. The said payment to be made to the contesting Respondents within a period of four weeks from date. (iii) The impugned orders dated 22nd December 2008 stands substituted by the instant order. (iv) As indicated above, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the Appellant, as well as the learned counsel for the contesting Respondents, no reasons have been recorded for the order. (v). The above Appeals are accordingly disposed of in terms of the above. (vi). In view of the disposal of the above Appeals, the Civil Applications do not survive and the same are accordingly disposed of. 6 [R.M.SAVANT, J]