Petitioner sought writ jurisdiction against District Court orders dismissing appeals in admiralty suits over temporary injunctions in concurrent civil proceedings, challenging jurisdictional facts and evidence.
Writ petition dismissed with no 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 W.P. 873.2013
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 873 OF 2013
Digambar Ramkrushna Patil V/s Shrawan Ramchandra Mahajan & Ors.
| Office Notes,Office | Court's or Judge's orders |
|---|---|
| Memoranda of |
|
| Coram,appearances, | ................................ |
| Court's orders or |
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. |
| directions and |
|
| Registrar's orders | DATE : 30/01/2013. |
Mr. V.Y.Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner.
PER COURT :
2 W.P. 873.2013
the present respondent to use the southern side space. No reliance can be placed on the Sanad as sale deed will over ride the Sanad. According to the learned counsel, the respondent is obstructing his right over the use of the said space. The Court could not have clamped injunction against the present petitioner. Both the Courts have not taken into consideration the documentary evidence on record. The photographs produced on record would also substantiate the case put-forth by the present petitioner. According to the learned counsel, the photographs and the sale deed executed in favour of Jagan i.e. brother of respondent No. 1 would show the real facts which have not been considered by the Courts below.
3 W.P. 873.2013
the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
6. The Writ Petition as such is dismissed. No costs.
[ S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. ]
KNP/W.P. 873.2013
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution regarding the orders of temporary injunction in concurrent civil suits.
Whether the lower courts erred in considering documentary evidence such as sale deed, Sanad, and affidavits while invoking injunction against both parties.
Digambar Ramkrushna Patil
Shrawan Ramchandra Mahajan
S.V. Gangapurwala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
