: 1 : SD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4325 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4325 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4325 OF 2005 IN IN IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1134 OF 2005 FIRST APPEAL NO.1134 OF 2005 FIRST APPEAL NO.1134 OF 2005 Kalapana Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd. ...Applicant V/s. Rajendra Pundalikrao Godshalvar ...Respondent Mr.S.A. Sawant, Advocate, for the Applicant. Mr.S.V. Kadam, Advocate, i/b. Kadam & Co., for the Respondent. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATE : 19TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 19TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 19TH MARCH, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties. 2. This is an application made by the respondent in the First Appeal praying for vacating interim order passed by this Court on 22nd June, 2005. His contention is that during the pendency of the suit, there was no such interim order operating in favour of the original plaintiff. 3. My attention has been invited to order dated 30th September, 2002 passed by the Trial Court on an application at Exhibit-5. The result of the order : 2 : dated 22nd June, 2005 passed by this Court is that the said order dated 30th September, 2002 which was operating till the disposal of the suit will continue to operate as interim order during the pendency of the Appeal. 4. After admission of the Appeal, if the said interim order is continued, it is obvious that there is no illegality. Therefore, no case is made out for vacating the interim relief. Application is rejected. [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]