1 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3894 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. K.N. Kore for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 8TH JUNE 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. This writ petition is directed against an interlocutory order permitting the respondent to withdraw the amount deposited by the petitioner at the rate of Rs.1000/- per month. I see no reason to interfere in the said order in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. In a suit filed by the respondent, a decree 2 for possession has been passed against the petitioner. In an appeal filed by the petitioner, conditional stay was granted for execution of the decree subject to depositing in the Court Rs. 4,000/- per month. In a writ petition filed against that order this Court, by an interim order, reduced the amount of Rs.4,000/- to Rs. 1,000/-. The money appears to have been deposited in the Court by the petitioner in pursuance of this order. Thereafter the respondent made a prayer in the appellate court for withdrawal of the amount so deposited. The learned Judge has permitted the withdrawal of the amount. 4. Undoubtedly, the appellate court while granting stay for execution of possession decree was empowered to impose appropriate conditions. While granting stay, a condition of deposit was imposed and that condition has slightly be modified by this Court by reducing the amount of deposit to Rs.1,000/- p.m. In my 3 view, the respondent, who has obtained the decree for possession, must be paid some compensation if the petitioner is to enjoy the possession during the pendency of the appeal. Hence, I see no error in the order passed by the appellate court. It must however be clarified that the amount withdrawn would be subject to adjustment in the light of final decree that may be passed and the mesne profits, if any, to be determined in the light of final decree. With this observation, the writ petition is accordingly rejected summarily. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)