1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2759 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.2976 OF 2007 Nalin Sukhlal Patel & Ors. .... Plaintiffs. V/s Jagdish Sukhlal Patel and Ors. .... Defendants. Mr. Yogesh K. Deshpande for plaintiffs. Ms. Usha Gadagkar for defendant Nos. 1 and 2. None for defendant No.3. CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATE : 12TH JANUARY, 2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of plaintiffs and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of defendant Nos. 1 and 2. None appears on behalf of defendant No.3. 2. By an ad-interim order dated 07/08/2008, ad-interim relief was granted in terms of prayer clause (a). Plaintiffs have an apprehension that defendant Nos. 1 and 2 may dispose of the suit flat by either selling it to any third party or defendant No.3 may dispose of the said property in view 2 of the attachment of the suit flat in the proceedings which are pending before the DRT. Counsel for plaintiffs submits that the order of attachment of the property passed by the DRT has been set aside. Counsel for plaintiffs submits that the Bank has preferred an appeal and the appeal is pending before the Appellate Tribunal of DRT. 3. Under these circumstances, therefore, in my view, it would be appropriate if a further order is passed in terms of prayer clause (c) of the Notice of Motion more particularly because no reply has bee filed by defendant No. 3 – Bank of Baroda. 4. Notice of Motion is, therefore, allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (c). 5. Counsel for defendant Nos. 1 and 2, after taking instructions from her clients, submits that defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have no intention of creating any third party rights in respect of the suit flat. 6. Notice of Motion is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.)