1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4924 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL No.2286 OF 2007 Smt.Molly Lobo : Applicant. Versus Kanha Kathod Patil & ors. : Respondents. Shri P.S.Dani for the Applicant. Shri Uday Warunjikar for the Respondents. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : AUGUST 01, 2008 P.C. 1. By the above Civil Application, the Applicant prays for the following reliefs, pending the First Appeal. a) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the First Appeal, the Respondents, their Agents, Servants, Contractors and/or any other person(s) claiming through them be restrained by an order of injunction from disturbing the possession of the present Applicant over the suit property and the said Respondents, their Agents, Servants, Contractors and/or any other person(s) claiming through them be further directed not to enter 2 into suit property in any manner whatsoever. (b) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the First Appeal, the Respondents, their Agents Servants, Contractors and/or any other person(s) claiming through them be restrained by an order of injunction from in any manner transferring and/or alienating and/or creating third party interest or changing the nature of property and/or from changing the status-quo of the suit property in any manner whatsoever by themselves or through their Agents, Servants, Contractors and/or any other person(s) claiming through them and the Respondents and their Agents, Servants, Contractors further be restrained from creating any charge upon or changing nature of the suit property in any manner whatsoever. 2. The Applicant/Appellant is the original Plaintiff whose suit for specific performance has been dismissed. Prima facie the findings recorded by the trial Court appear to be not inconsonance with the material on record. The Applicant/Appellant filed the said suit relying upon an agreement for sale dated 5.3.2001 in respect of 3 three properties owned by Defendant No.1. In respect of two properties sale deeds were executed. But in respect of one property it was not. Therefore, the said suit came to be filed. It appears that, a Confirmation Deed was executed on 15.4.2002 by the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2. By the said Confirmation Deed it was agreed that the land in question would be conveyed to the Applicant/Appellant. However, prior to the said Confirmation Deed dated 15.4.2002, the property in question was sold to Respondent No.3 herein by a registered sale deed dated 29.9.2001. Hence the Applicant/Appellant had filed Special Civil Suit No.36 of 2003 for specific performance and other reliefs. 3. It would be pertinent to note that in the said suit the Applicant/Appellant had filed an application for temporary injunction numbered as Exhibit-5. Against the order passed on the said application, the matter had reached this Court by way of A.O. No.864 of 2005. This Court by an order dated 13.12.2005, considering the finding which was recorded by the trial Court, remanded the matter 4 back to the trial Court with directions that the trial Court to specifically give a finding as to who is in possession of the property in question. The trial Court thereafter on remand of the matter by order dated 6.5.2006 held that the Applicant/Appellant, who is the Plaintiff, was in possession of the property in question. Though undoubtedly after a fulfledged trial it has been held that the relief sought by the Applicant/Appellant has been refused by the trial Court, in my view since the First Appeal is admitted and since it has been held that the Applicant/Plaintiff was in possession of the property in question during pendency of the said suit, the ad-interim order granted by this Court on 3.10.2007 is required to be confirmed and is accordingly confirmed, pending the hearing and final disposal of the above First Appeal. The Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. [R.M.SAVANT, J]