1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.18 OF 2010 Gangadhar Sidhappa Batkadali .. Appellant Versus Dinkar Mangaji Karde .. Respondent Mrs.P.U.Badadare for appellant Mr.Sagar A. Mane i/b. N.V.Bandivadekar for respondent. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 23rd March 2010. P.C.: 1] In a suit for specific performance, the appellant original defendant has been restrained from alienating the suit property and from disturbing possession of the respondent original plaintiff. 2] From the prima facie conclusions of the learned Judge, including that the original plaintiff has paid the loan amount i.e. Rs.6,63,000/- so also has cleared the consideration to the extent of Rs.7,51,000/- then, in such circumstances, preserving the suit property so also not permitting the appellant - original defendant from disturbing possession of the respondent plaintiff, is an order which is preeminently just, fair and 2 proper and based on the prima facie conclusions. The same does not warrant any interference in this Court's jurisdiction under Order 43 Rule 1 of C.P.C. Appeal dismissed. 3] From the order so also the terms of injunction, it is apparent that the original defendant is not restrained from putting any construction on the property and, therefore, the clarification sought also need not be granted. 4] In view of dismissal of the appeal, civil application taken out does not survive and the same is dismissed accordingly. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)