The Court dismissed a civil application seeking an injunction and maintenance of status-quo regarding property. It held that granting such relief would be improper since lower courts found the plaintiff had no title.
Application dismissed with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1072 OF 2004
IN
SECOND APPEAL NO.913 OF 2004
Dwarkabai Baburao Jagtap and Ors. ..Appellants
Versus
Gajarabai Anandrao Jagtap & Ors. ..Respondents
Mr.G.S.Godbole for appellants
Mr.P.B.Shah for respondents
CORAM : P.V.KAKADE, J.
DATE : 26TH AUGUST, 2005
P.C.:
. This is an application filed by the appellant
against the respondent seeking injunction pending the
appeal in respect of the suit property and also not to
create any third party interest pending the appeal.
After hearing both the parties and perusal of the entire
record, it appears that both the courts below have
recorded concurrent findings that the appellant has no
right, title and interest in the suit property and as
such the suit for ownership and consequential relief of
injunction came to be dismissed. it is to be noted that
through out proceedings before the lower courts there
was no temporary injunction operative in this dispute.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant fairly
: 2 :
consented that the prayer clause (a) seeking injunction
pending the appeal was not pressed, however, it was
further submitted that status-quo with regard to the
suit property may be granted pending the appeal, which
submission is stoutly contested on behalf of the
respondent. In this regard it must be noted that when
both the courts below have concurred with the findings
to the effect that the plaintiff has no right, title and
interest to the suit property, it would not be just and
proper at this stage to restrain the respondents by any
restrictive order even in the nature of maintenance of
status-quo. On the other hand it is to be noted that in
case the appellants succeed in this appeal they have
independent remedy with regard to the suit property
and/or compliance thereof. Under the circumstances I am
inclined to hold that the application is devoid of any
merits and cannot be granted. The present application
stands dismissed with no order as to costs.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a status-quo order should be granted pending appeal despite concurrent findings that the appellant has no title or interest in the suit property.
Dwarkabai Baburao Jagtap and Ors.
Gajarabai Anandrao Jagtap & Ors.
P.V.Kakade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court