1 4517.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4517 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1803 OF 2010 Shri.Pyarelal Ramkishore Prajapati ...Applicant Versus M/s.Arcade (India) Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondent ...... Mr.P.S.Dani with Mr.Rajdeep Khadapkar for Applicant/Appellant. Mr.P.O.Verghese for Respondent. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED:- MARCH 23, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Appeal is already admitted in terms of order dated 15th February, 2011 after hearing both sides. That presupposes that arguable case has already been made out by the appellant. The decree passed against the Appellant is one of specific performance. If no interim relief is granted in favour of the appellant during the pendency of the appeal, the appellant would suffer irreparable loss. In our opinion, interim relief as prayed for deserves to be granted. 2 4517.10 3. According to the respondent, however, the Appellant be put to some terms. In that, the Appellant be ordered to pay compensation to the respondent during the pendency of the appeal. For, the appellant would enjoy possession of the suit property. The respondent would be free to take out a formal application in that behalf which will be considered on its own merits. 4. For the time being, we would stay the operation of the decree which is impugned in the appeal. 5. The Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is not interested in withdrawing the amount of consideration deposited by the respondent before the lower Court. In that case, the amount be invested in appropriate fixed deposit scheme, which will enure till the disposal of the appeal or such further order to be passed by the Court in due course. 6. Application disposed of on the above terms. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKlAR, J.)