1 26.cas 122.11 ast IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 122 OF 2011 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 131 OF 2001 Ganpat Abaji Lawand. ....Applicant. Vs. Sharad Baburao Lawand. ....Respondent. Mr. Suhas Deokar h/f. C.G. Gavnekar, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. Rohan Dharandale h/f. Mr. Rajesh Datar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 4. CORAM:- GIRISH GODBOLE, J DATED:- OCTOBER 17, 2011 P.C. 1. By earlier order dated 22 nd August, 2011 prayer clause (a) was rejected. Rule was issued only on prayer clause (b). Mr. Dharandale appears for Respondent Nos. 1 and 4 who are contesting Respondents. Affidavit in reply has been filed. Contention of the Applicant that the Respondent is altering status of the suit property is denied and it is stated that since house No. 10B was dilapidated a new house in the same place has been 2 26.cas 122.11 constructed. 2. No interim injunction has ever operated in favour of the Appellant in the Trial Court or in the District Court or in this Second Appeal which is pending since 2001. Hence no case for grant of injunction is made out. It is needless to state that if any improvement or alienation is made by the Respondent during the pendency of the Appeal no equities will be claimed by the Respondent and any such improvement or alienation or construction will be subject to the final outcome of the Second Appeal. 3. With aforesaid clarification Civil Application is disposed of. Rule on prayer clause (b) is discharged. Hearing of the Appeal is expedited. (GIRISH GODBOLE, J)