Quashed

Nandkumar Natwarlal Devi v. M/S. Vardhman Enterprises, through Partner, Vijaya Rajendra Semlani and Ors.

Bombay HC16 Apr 2013CAW/1018/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court quashed an order granting a temporary injunction established the order was based on insufficient material set aside the order and remanded the matter to the Trial Court for fresh consideration after the parties have an opportunity to produce new evidence.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 23/12/2011 and 4/12/2012 quashed; matter remanded to Trial Court for de-novo consideration of temporary injunction application within three months; Civil Application No. 1018 of

Nandkumar Natwarlal Devi Vs M/S. Vardhman Enterprises… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

wp-12167.12&ca-1018.13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.12167 OF 2012

¶4

M/s. Vardhaman Enterprises Registered Partnership Firm Through Partner Vijaya Rajendra Semlani & ors. : Petitioners. Versus Mr.Nandkumar Natwarlal & ors : Respondents

¶5

WITH

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1018 OF 2013

¶7

Mr.Nandkumar Natwarlal : Applicant. Versus M/s.Vardhaman Enterprises Registered Partnership Firm Through Partner Vijaya Rajendra Semlani and ors. : Respondents.

¶8

Mr. Y S Jahagirdar, Senior Advocate with Mr. S R Nargolkar for the Petitioners. Mr. V S Gokhale for the Respondent No.1.

¶9

CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 16^th April 2013

¶10

P.C.

¶11

1 The writ jurisdiction of this Court is invoked against the order dated 4/12/2012 passed by the learned District Judge-16 Pune by which order the Appeal filed by the Respondent No.1 herein came to be allowed and resultantly the application for injunction filed by the Plaintiff came to be allowed to the extent of restraining the Defendant Nos.10 to 15 from

¶12

lgc

¶13

1 of 4

¶14

wp-12167.12&ca-1018.13

¶15

obstructing the Plaintiff’s possession over the suit property till decision of the suit.

¶16

2 In the above Petition, the Respondent No.1 herein who is the original Plaintiff has filed Civil Application No.1018 of 2013. To the said Civil Application are appended a host of documents which are from page No.9 to 229. The relief sought in the Civil Application is that the said documents may be taken into consideration by this Court whilst adjudicating upon the aspect of possession in the above Petition.

¶17

3 The Trial Court as well as the Lower Appellate Court has considered the application for temporary injunction on the basis of the material that was before them. The documents which have now been appended to the above Civil Application were obviously not before the Courts below, and therefore, the above Civil Application has been filed for the relief sought therein.

¶18

4 During the course of hearing of the above Petition for admission, the learned counsel appearing for the parties have arrived at a consensus that in view of the documents which are now produced by the Respondent No.1 in support of his case that he is in possession, both the orders i.e. the order of the Trial Court as well as the impugned order passed by the Lower Appellate Court

¶19

2 of 4

¶20

lgc

¶21

wp-12167.12&ca-1018.13

¶22

be set aside and the matter be relegated back to the Trial Court for a fresh consideration of the application for temporary injunction which consideration would now be on the basis of the documents which have now been produced by way of the above Civil Application. In view of the said consensus between the learned counsel for the parties, which consensus has been arrived at on the basis of the instructions given to them by their respective clients, it is not necessary to pass a detailed reasoned order. Hence the order dated 23/12/2011 passed by the Trial Court as well as the impugned order dated 4/12/2012 passed by the learned District Judge-16, Pune are set aside and the matter is relegated back to the Trial Court for a de-novo consideration of the application Exhibit 5 for temporary injunction. The Respondent No.1 would be entitled to produce the documents which are appended to the above Civil Application from page No.9 to 229 in the Trial Court by filing an affidavit. The Petitioner herein would be entitled to file a reply to the said affidavit and deal with the documents in question. Both the parties would also be at liberty to produce additional material in support of their respective assertions. The Trial Court would consider the said application Exhibit 5 for temporary injunction on its own merits and in accordance with law uninfluenced by the earlier observations contained in the orders which are impugned in the present Petition. The application Exhibit 5 be decided within a period of three months of the parties appearing before it. The parties to appear before the Trial Court on 29/04/2013 With the aforesaid directions the above Writ Petition is

¶23

3 of 4

¶24

lgc

¶25

wp-12167.12&ca-1018.13

¶26

disposed of. It is clarified that this Court has not considered the documents which have been appended to the above Civil Application and it is for the Trial Court to consider the said documents independently. In view of the order passed in the above Writ Petition, the Civil Application No.1018 of 2013 does not survive and the same to accordingly stand disposed of as such.

¶27

[R.M.SAVANT, J]

¶28

4 of 4

¶29

lgc

Nandkumar Natwarlal Devi v. M/S. Vardhman Enterprises, through Partner, Vijaya Rajendra Semlani and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandkumar Natwarlal Devi v. M/S. Vardhman Enterprises, through Partner, Vijaya Rajendra Semlani and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Vijay Prabhakar Galinde and Ors. Vs Shri. Bharat Yashwant Gawade and Ors.

Revnisiddhppa Gursiddhppa Loni Vs Vishawanath Virapakshppa Avasekar (Sinc Decd) through Lrs, Arvind Viashwanath Avasekar and Ors.

Arvind Yallappa Kamble and Ors. Vs Devastan Vyavastapan Samiti, Acschim Maharashtra, through Secretary and Ors.

Deepak Ramesh Mehta Vs Vasudeo Kishan Kadam

Sou. Kamalabai Mahadeo Mirgane Vs Shri. Gokuldas Ambadas Shelake and Anr.

Shri. Govind Genu Kalokhe Vs Shri. Ramdas Tukaram Kalohe and Anr.