: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.943 OF 2009 Alamgir Fakir Shaikh ... Appellant V/s. Maimunnisa Sikandar Bardi & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.S.M. Suryawanshi for Appellant Mr.M.T. Narvekar for Respondent Nos.1 to 4 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: FEBRUARY 8, 2010 P.C.: 1. The appeal from order has been preferred against the refusal of interim relief to the plaintiff who is the appellant herein. The plaintiff’s case is that he executed an agreement under which the respondents agreed to sell the property to him @ Rs.1 lakh per acre. According to the plaintiff, after receipt of Rs.2 lakhs, the respondents have refused to convey the property by signing the requisite deed. 2. The trial Court has refused the injunction on the ground that the plaintiff has not been able to make out any case for the same. The trial Court has observed that even assuming the plaintiff had paid Rs.2 lakhs to the defendants as contended by him there were no documents on record to establish the same. The trial Court has in fact considered two agreements one dated 6.12.2006 and another of 12.1.2007. : 2 : 3. The trial Court has, in my opinion, considered these documents in their proper perspective and has found that prima facie the plaintiff has not made out any case to the grant of interim relief. I have no hesitation in upholding the order. 4. Appeal is therefore rejected. 5. In view of the above, nothing remains in Civil Application No.1175 of 2009 and the same is dismissed accordingly. 6. The learned advocate for the appellant seeks a stay of this order and prays that the order of status quo which was granted on 7.9.2009 be continued. In my view, since the documents itself do not prima face indicate that the plaintiff has a case, there is no need to grant any stay. Hence, stay is refused.