1 CAW No.2770/10 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2770 of 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1543 of 2010 Chhaya Vijay Jadhav ... Applicant versus (i) Gopal Vithal Pol (ii)Vishnu Vitthal Pol (iii)Vasant Vitthal Pol (iv)Vatsala Vilas Pol (v)Sou.Sindhu Ashok Rupwate (vi)Sou.Sushma S. Nikalje (vii)Shri Popat K. Pol (viii)Smt.Shakuntala S. Pol (ix)Shri Mukesh Sampat Pol (x)Nita Shekhar Gedam (xi)Shantabai Raghunath Bhavle ... Respondents ... Mr. P.P. More for the applicant Ms.A.R.S. Baxi for respondent nos. 1 to 6. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 14th January 2011. 2 CAW No.2770/10 P.C. 1. This application has been filed by the applicant for grant of an interim relief pending the hearing and disposal of the writ petition. In the application, it is alleged that while issuing of a rule in the writ petition, this Court inadvertently did not extend the ad-interim relief which was granted earlier in the matter. Learned counsel for the respondent disputes this position and submits that this court deliberately did not pass an order extending the ad-interim relief in view of provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 3A of Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Rule was issued by me and therefore, the matter has been placed before me. I had not granted interim relief and had not extended the ad-interim relief in view of the provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 3A of Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure. As such, if at all the applicant was aggrieved by reason of not grant of an interim relief, the only remedy for him was to file an appeal against the refusal to extend ad-interim relief. Civil Application is rejected. (D.G.KARNIK, J)