IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 111 OF 2005 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 111 OF 2005 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 111 OF 2005 IN IN IN SUIT NO. 3575 OF 2004 SUIT NO. 3575 OF 2004 SUIT NO. 3575 OF 2004 Madhav Hari Damle & anr .. Plaintiff versus Prabhavati U.Sathe .. Defendant ... Mr.M.M.Shetty for Plaintiff. Ms.Meena Doshi for Defendant. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 24th February, 2005. DATED : 24th February, 2005. DATED : 24th February, 2005. P.C:- P.C:- P.C:- 1. The defendant through her counsel Ms Doshi states that the defendant would not sell, transfer, alienate or part with possession of the flat described in prayer (a) of the motion. Statement is recorded and accepted. In view of this learned counsel for the plaintiff does not press the motion. Motion is disposed of recording the statement of the defendant as above. D.G.KARNIK, J