IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL A.O. No. 76 of 2009 Smt. Santosh Sethi and another …..Defendants/appellants. Versus Shri Kailash Narayan Bansal …..Plaintiff/Respondent. Present : Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Advocate for the defendants/appellants. Mr. A. Rab, Advocate for the plaintiffs/respondents. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Heard Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Advocate for the defendants/appellants as well as Mr. A. Rab, Advocate for the plaintiffs/respondents. With the consent of both the parties, this Appeal from Order is being disposed of with the following order :- This appeal from order arises out from an order passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division) dated 19.12.2008 in O.S. No. 356 of 2008 Shri K.N. Bansal Vs. Smt. Santosh Sethi and another, on an application moved by the plaintiffs/respondents, by which it was ordered that during the pendency of the suit the defendants/appellants would not change the nature of the property nor will it transfer the property to any body or give possession of the property to any body and also not create any third party interest. Vide order dated 25.3.2009 of this Court, the effect and operation of the impugned order was stayed. Now counter affidavit has been filed by the plaintiffs/respondents. Learned counsels for both the parties are agreed that no useful purpose will be solved if the appeal remains pending before this court and therefore the appeal may be disposed of with the slight modification of the order. Therefore, this appeal is disposed of with the following directions :- It is directed that during the pendency of the suit being O.S. No. 356 of 2008 the defendants/appellants shall neither create any third party interest nor change the nature of the property. It is further directed that the suit itself will be disposed of as expeditiously as possible without granting unnecessary adjournments, except when they are absolutely necessary when they are in the interest of justice. At this juncture, learned counsel for the defendants/appellants Mr. Arvind Vashisth stated 2 that this would be unnecessary restriction on defendants/appellants inasmuch as they may not be able to even give the property even temporarily for rent. Therefore, it is clarified that in case such a need is felt by the defendants/appellants, he shall move a proper application before the trial court which shall be subject to the decision of the trial court. With these observations, Appeal from Order is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 29.9.2010 Kuldeep