1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. COMPANY APPEAL NO.2 OF 2007 IN MISC. APPLICATION NO.447 OF 2006 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.96 OF 2006 Dharmadev Infrastructure Ltd. ..Appellant. Vs. Madhuri Y. Mafatlal & Ors. ..Respondents. ... Mr. Jay Chinoy, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Jain i/b Dhruve Liladhar & Co. for the Appellant. Mr. Anil D'Souza with Ms. Sudeshna Roy i/b Paras Kuhad & Associates for Respondent No.1. Ms. Rupali Dixit i/b Maneksha & Sethna for Respondents 2 and 3. ... CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 3rd May, 2007. P.C. : The Company Law Board has by the impugned order dated 10th January, 2007 impleaded the Appellant as a party to the Company Petition. It appears that during the pendency of the 2 proceedings a deed of conveyance was executed on 27th September, 2006. In view thereof, the Company Law Board directed the parties to maintain status quo until the next date of hearing and the matter was directed to be heard on 20th February, 2007. The Court has been informed that the proceedings before the Company Law Board have by consent been adjourned to 2nd July, 2007. In that view of the matter, since the impugned order is only an ad interim order to be operative till the next date of hearing, it is not necessary for this Court to express a view, one way or the other, on the correctness of the order. The Company Law Board is requested to take up the application for continuation of the ad interim order as against the Appellant on the adjourned date of hearing and even if it is not possible for the Board to consider the grant of any wider reliefs that have been prayed for in the Company Petition, the issue as to whether the ad interim order qua the Appellant shall be continued any further shall be dealt with on the adjourned date. With these observations, the Appeal is disposed of.