FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CIVIL APPLCIATION NO [CAF] 249/2010 & 752/2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.75/2010 GAVATYA S/O DASHRATH NANHE ..VS.. KHAWAJA HRIB NAWAZ HOUSING SOCIETY & ORS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri B.G.Kulkarni, advocate for the appellant Shri A.Gharote, advocate for respondent no.1 Shri Chandurkar, advocate for respondent no.2 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : APRIL 7, 2010 . CIVIL APPCLIAITON CAF NO.249/2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the judgment passed by the trial Court. Since the first appeal is admitted and the matter relates to a suit for specific performance of contract, it is necessary to stay the effect and execution of the decree during the pendency of the first appeal. Hence the prayer made in the civil application is granted. The judgment and decree passed by the trial court is stayed during the pendency of the first appeal. Civil application disposed. JUDGE CIVIL APPCLIATION NO.[CAF]752/2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the contents of the civil application. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it is necessary to grant the prayer made in the first part of the prayer clause A i.e. to restrain the appellants and respondent no.2 from creating any third party interest in the suit property. Though the first part of the prayer relates only to the appellants and respondent no.2, it is however, made clear by this order that the respondent no.1 is also restrained from creating any third party interest in the suit property during the pendency of the first appeal. By the second part of the prayer A the respondent no.1 has prayed that the appellant and the respondent no.2 may be restrained from disturbing the possession of respondent no.1 and its members during the pendency of the appeal. Though it is stated on behalf of the respondent no.1 that the respondent no.1 and its members are in possession of the suit property and a finding to that effect is recorded by the trial court, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 Seriously disputes this fact and states that the respondent no.2 is in possession of the suit property. It appears that during the pendency of the civil suit, the trial court had directed the parties to maintain status-quo and it is necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the aforesaid dispute as regards the possession, to direct the parties to maintain status-quo as regards the possession. Therefore the parties are directed to maintain status quo during the pendency of the first appeal. Civil application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and disposed of. JUDGE SMP