Allowed

Vinayak M. Gandhi v. Mr. Mahesh N. Desai

Bombay HC24 Mar 2006NMS/1102/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a suit regarding possession of premises, the court disposed of a notice of motion by granting an injunction restraining the defendant from parting with possession or creating third-party interests, noting the defendant's lack of ownership.

What did the court decide?

Injunction restraining the defendant from entering, remaining on, parting with possession of, or creating third-party interests in the suit premises.

Vinayak M. Gandhi Vs Mr. Mahesh N. Desai — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶2

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1102 OF 2005
IN
SUIT NO. 983 OF 2005

¶3

Vinaykant Mulchand Gandhi... PLAINTIFF

¶4

V/s.

¶5

Mahesh N. Desai... DEFENDANT

¶6

Ms. Neela A. Mahato for the plaintiff.
Mr. P.G. Desai for the defendant.

¶7

CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.
DATED : 24th March, 2006

¶8

P.C.

¶9

. Heard parties.

¶10

2.Considering the averments made and in view of

¶11

the order passed on 19th April, 2005 whereby during
the pendency of the motion, the defendant is
restrained from parting with the possession of the
suit premises or otherwise creating third party
interest in the suit premises. Considering this and
in view of undisputed position on record that
defendant is not owner of the property, but still he
is in possession of the same I am inclined to grant
prayer clause (b) except bracketed portion.

¶12

3. There is no case made out for appointment of a

¶13

( 2 )

¶14

receiver in Notice of Motion dated 25th February, 2005
in question. So far as prayer clause (c) is
concerned, at this stage mesne profit for wrongful
occupation of the premises cannot be considered. In
view of this, the Notice of Motion is disposed of in
terms of prayer clause (b), except bracketed portion.

¶15

Clause (b) -

¶16

.that pending the hearing and final disposal of
the suit, the Defendant by himself, his servants and
agents be restrained by an Order and Injunction of
this Hon’ble Court (from entering or remaining on the
said premises or storing any goods therein or) from
parting with possession thereof or any part thereof
and from inducting any third party or from alienating
or encumbering the said premises or any part thereof
or creating any third party rights therein in any
manner whatsoever.

¶17

4.Plaintiff is at liberty to take out

¶18

appropriate proceedings if case is made out. Notice
of Motion is accordingly disposed of.

¶19

[ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]

Vinayak M. Gandhi v. Mr. Mahesh N. Desai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinayak M. Gandhi v. Mr. Mahesh N. Desai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Anuradha Vinod Ovalekar Vs Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. and Ors.

Shri Ramkaran Jaganath Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sejpal Textiles Vs Girishkumar Devji Bhimji and Ors.

Maharashtra Power Development Corpn. Ltd. Vs Energy Enterprises Maurtius Co. and Ors.

Perveez Dinshow Jesia and Ors. Vs Narendra Jhaveri and Ors.

State Bank of India Vs Kanan Tangave and Ors.