1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1468 OF 2008 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.1209 OF 2005 Sau Sarita Shidligappa Shetye ..Applicant/ Appellant V/s. Sanotsh Pundalik Sarudkar ..Respondent Mr.Sachin Gite for the Appellant/Applicant. Mr.Walimbe for the Respondent. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : AUGUST 29TH, 2008. P.C. By the above Civil Application the Applicant seeks extension of time to vacate the suit premises. The above Second Appeal has been dismissed on 31st August, 2007. It appears that no application was made on the said day seeking time to vacate the premises. It is only after a 2 possession warrant came to be issued some time in April, 2008, that Civil Application being NO.872 of 2008 was filed by the Applicant above named seeking time to vacate the premises. This Court by order dated 5th May, 2008 granted four months time to vacate the said suit premises on the usual undertaking being filed by the Appellant/Applicant. Accordingly, the Appellant/Applicant has filed an undertaking dated 30th April, 2008. Whereby she undertook to vacate the suit premises by end of August, 2008. 2. The above Civil Application has now been filed seeking an extension of time to vacate the premises on the ground that the Appellant is more than 65 years old and has not been able to secure any other premises for her residence. On the other hand, it is submitted by Shri Walimbe, the learned counsel for the Respondent in the above Civil 3 Application i.e. the decree holder that the Applicant/Appellant is not using the premises in question and that after the extension has granted by order dated 5th May, 2008, the Applicant was intimidated by the Respondent and therefore no extension of time be granted. 3. It is significant to not that though the Appeal was dismissed by order dated 31st August, 2007, the Applicant continued to reside in the premises and took no steps to abide by the decree which was passed against her. It is only when possession warrant was issued in April, 2008 that the said Civil Application NO.872 of 2008 came to be filed by the Appellant/Applicant, in the process the Appellant/Applicant has enjoyed the premises for almost a period of six months and thereafter pursuant to the order dated 5th May, 2008 for a further period of six months. The reasons given by 4 the Applicant seeking extension cannot be countenanced as the factual possession as regards the age of the Applicant is the same as was on 5th May, 2008. In that view of the matter, no reliefs can be granted to the Appellant/Applicant in the above Civil Application, which is accordingly dismissed. 4. The learned counsel for the Appellant Shri Gite on instructions of the Applicant who is present in Court today states that the Applicant would hand over possession of the suit premises on 31st August, 2008. [R.M.SAVANT, J.] 5