JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal has arisen in the following circumstances. Gujarat Gas Company has filed a suit for specific performance of agreement with the defendant respondents, concerning amalgamation of respondent no.2 company with plaintiff company which was agreed to while sponsoring a scheme for the revival of respondent no.2 company, which had become sick and proceedings in that respect were before BIFR. At one point of time the said scheme was sanctioned by BIFR which according to the statement of both the learned Counsel later on was set aside on an appeal by the sick company before AAIFR. While proceedings were pending before BIFR & AAIFR the present plaintiff appellant has filed the suit for specific performance and has also asked for temporary injunction against defendants through notice of motion on 27.4.94. As a result of the memo of understanding arrived between the parties ad-interim order was granted in terms of para 24(b) of the notice of motion until further orders. Against the order dated 27.4.94, the defendants filed appeal no.145/94. The ad-interim order dated 27.4.94 was modified by trial Court by its order dated 4.5.97 permitting the defendants to sell 2 of its machines as prayed for by the defendants.

2. The appeal no.145/94 was decided by this court on 21st January, 1995 considering that ad-interim order has been made as a result of memo of understanding and even written statement has not been filed to application exh.5, the court did not consider it appropriate to adjudicate on the merits of the case. However, the court further considered that as the point involved in the main suit is short one and in case the parties agree before the Trial Court, the suit can also be disposed of on the basis of affidavit evidence as suggested by the court and to which both the learned counsel has consented to endeavour, the court directed that the civil Court may decide the main suit as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one year from the date of the certified copy of the order is made available to the City Civil Court and in the meantime instead of the ad-interim injunction granted by the Civil Court in terms of para. 24(b) Exh.5 rights of the parties will be governed by the following terms:

"The appellant shall maintain status quo as prevailing on 26.4.94 and shall not alienete the immovable properties of appellant no.2 company and shall not commit the company for anything having long term implications on the operations of the Company's properties."

With these directions, the appeal was disposed of.

3. Thereafter, a Misc. C.A. No.60/96 was moved in appeal from orders no.145/94 seeking modification of the order on the ground that proceedings before BIFR has proceeded further and BIFR has granted permission to sell surplus 2 rubber injection moulding machines after following appropriate sale procedure on 5.9.95. While BIFR has granted permission to dispose of the aforesaid properties but the injunction passed in A.O.No.145/94 being operating for maintaining status quo as on 26.4.94 same was required to be modified to avail the permission by BIFR. The Court disposed the Civil application by observing that:-

"The applicants may approach the concerned City Civil Court where the main matter is still said to be pending. Should the present applicants approach the concerned City Civil Court with any application on the basis of the BIFR's order dated 5.9.95, the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad may pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law in the light of the subsequent order dated 5.9.95 passed by BIFR and this court's order dated 21.1.95 to maintain status quo as prevailing on 26.4.94 will be no impediment against the concerned City Civil Court, Ahmedabad from passing any appropriate order in accordance with law, which deems proper in the facts and circumstances of this case."

4. This order was made on 27.2.96. Thereafter by the impugned order dated 29.10.97 the City Civil Court No.2 has rejected plaintiffs notice