1 104 ao.357.11 anr ndm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 357 OF 2011 Dr.Suresh Shripad Mavalankar and another. ... Appellants Versus M/s. Goodwill Properties Private Limited and others. ... Respondents ----- Mr. Ajay Panicker i/b Ajay Law Associates for the Appellants. Mr. N.V.Walawalkar, Senior Counsel, i/b M/s.Shah and Sanghavi for Respondent Nos.1, 6 and 7. ----- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 25 th April, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2 The Appellants claim on the basis of an agreement for sale of suit flat executed on 24 th August, 1982. The suit is filed for enforcing the obligations of the Respondents under the provision of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 on the basis of the said Agreement. The notice of motion for temporary injunction was taken out, which has been dismissed by the trial Court. The learned 2 104 ao.357.11 anr counsel appearing for the Appellants submits that the trial Court has committed an error by recording findings on the issue of bar of limitation, which are final in nature. He submitted that the Appellants are ready and willing to pay the balance amount and there is no default on the part of the Appellants. 3 I have considered the submission. I have perused the impugned order. The suit was filed in the year 2010 for enforcing the obligations under the suit agreement dated 24 th August, 1982. The learned trial Judge has observed that there was prima-facie material on record to show that in the year 1990 and 1993 the Appellants had knowledge about refusal of the Respondents to perform the said agreement. Only on the ground of gross delay and latches, the learned trial Judge has declined to grant equitable relief of temporary injunction. The finding of gross delay is certainly based on material on record. 4 It is obvious that the findings recording in the impugned order are only tentative and prima-facie findings and that the trial Court will not be influenced by the said findings while deciding the suit finally. As the suit is pending, it is obvious that if any third party rights are created in respect of the suit flat, the same will be subject to final outcome of the suit. 3 104 ao.357.11 anr 5 Subject to what is observed above, no case for interference is made out. Accordingly, the appeal from order is dismissed. 6 Hearing of the suit is expedited. [ A.S.OKA, J ]