In this temporary injunction application, the court declined the interim relief sought by applicants but clarified that any construction by respondents remains subject to the final outcome of Second Appeal no. 37 of 2005.
Relief sought for temporary injunction denied; construction subject to final appeal result.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 85 OF 2005
IN
SECOND APPEAL NO. 37 OF 2005
SMT.RUKMINI A.JOSHI AND 14 ORS., Versus SHRI SOMNATH N.SAWANT DESAI AND 24 ORS.,
... Applicants
... Respondents
Mr.S.D. Lotlikar, Senior Counsel for the applicants. Mr. S.S. Kakodkar,advocate For R. 1 And 2
Coram:A. P. LAVANDE, J.
Date:1st February, 2011
P.C:
Heard Mr. Lotlikar, learned Senior counsel for the applicants and Mr. Kakodkar, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and 2.
This is an application for temporary injunction filed by the applicants praying for restraining the respondents from carrying out any construction in the suit property.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties I am not inclined to grant the relief sought for considering the facts and circumstances of the case. However, it is made clear that any construction carried out in the suit property shall be subject to the final result of Second appeal no.37 of 2005.
The application stands disposed of accordingly.
A. P. LAVANDE, J.
ap/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court is inclined to grant a temporary injunction restraining respondents from constructing in the suit property.
SMT.RUKMINI A.JOSHI AND 14 ORS.
SHRI SOMNATH N.SAWANT DESAI AND 24 ORS.
A. P. LAVANDE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
