1 srk app-L-834-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL (LODGING) NO.834 OF 2010 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1964 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO.1965 OF 2010 Mallika Madhukant Jhaveri ... Appellant Versus Jasmine Sanjay Shah (Nee Jasmine Madhukant Jhaveri) and others. ... Respondents Mr. Venkatesh Dhond i/by Mr. R.A. Shaikh for the appellant. Mr. D.H. Mehta with Ms. Preeti Gada and Ms. Bharti Shivarkar i/by Mr. Sudhir Shah for respondent No.1. Mr. Sanskar Marathe i/by M/s. Siganporia & Dalvi for respondent Nos.2 and 7. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. Wednesday, December 01, 2010 P .C. The learned counsel for the appellant-original defendant No.1 seeks leave to withdraw ground (b) in the appeal memo and tenders an apology for having taken up such a ground in the appeal memo. 2. In view of the above, there is no question of interfering with the directions given by the learned trial Judge in para 5 of the order under appeal passed at the ad-interim stage. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant, however, submits that since the notice of motion is still pending for hearing before the learned trial Judge, the plaintiff should not have been granted liberty to withdraw the amount of Rs. 2 srk app-L-834-10.sxw 3 crores even upon furnishing security and that the appellant would have no objection to the plaintiff withdrawing the interest accrued on investment of Rs. 3 crores in the fixed deposit with a nationalised bank. 4. Since the notice of motion is still pending for hearing before the learned trial Judge and the notice of motion is fixed for hearing on 3rd December, 2010, we do not express any opinion on the above submission, and the learned trial Judge shall consider the above submission while passing the final order on the notice of motion. We, however, grant stay of the said liberty till the learned trial Judge hears and decides the notice of motion finally. 5. It is further clarified that since the appellant had stated before the learned trial Judge that the appellant-defendant No.1 will deposit the amount of Rs.3 crores in this Court on/or before 25th November, 2010, the time to deposit the said amount is extended by one week from today. 6. The appeal is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. It is clarified that we may not be treated to have gone into the merits of the matter and all contentions are kept open. We also record the statement made by the learned counsel for the appellant-defendant No.1 that defendant No.1 will pay the rent/license fees of 12 months, in advance for the premises presently in occupation of the plaintiff. CHIEF JUSTICE S.J. KATHAWALLA, J.