1 61 ao.997.10 ndm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 997 OF 2010 Smt. Vithabai Dattatraya Patil and others. ... Appellants Versus Vardichand Sukhalal Sisediya and anr. ... Respondents ----- Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil for the Appellants. ----- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 28 th March, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Appellants. 2 The first Respondent filed a suit for specific performance of agreement for sale dated 13 th March, 2004. The application for temporary injunction was made by the first Respondent. By the impugned order, the said application was allowed and the Appellants (the Defendant Nos.1 to 3) were restrained from making any construction on the suit property or from creating third party interest till the disposal of the suit. 2 61 ao.997.10 3 The learned counsel appearing for the Appellants submitted that there were various issues involved in the suit. He submitted that such drastic interim relief could not have been granted in the facts of the case. He submitted that the Appellants cannot be prevented from carrying on construction. 4 I have given careful consideration to the submissions. The operative part of the impugned order reads thus: “O R D E R Application is hereby granted as under :- 1. Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 are hereby restrained from raising any type of construction in the suit property or from creating third party interest in it till the disposal of this suit. 2. Costs in cause.” 5 The trial Court has recorded a finding that the first Appellant has accepted practically the entire consideration payable under the suit agreement from the first Respondent. The learned trial Judge has held 3 61 ao.997.10 that admittedly, Respondent No.1 has been put in possession of the suit property on the date of the suit agreement. 6 In view of the aforesaid prima-facie findings based on admitted facts, equitable relief of temporary injunction has been granted, which is operative from 2 nd December, 2009. No case is made out for interference with the discretionary order passed by the trial Court. Appeal from order is accordingly dismissed. However, all contentions of the Appellants on merits of the suit are kept open and the suit shall be decided without being influenced by the impugned order and the confirmation thereof by this Court. [ A.S.OKA, J ]