Shri Govindnath Develaya, through Const. Attorney Krishna Vitthal Naik. Vs Ramesh Fondu Borkar and 4 Ors.

There is a decree for declaration and permanent injunction as also for mandatory injunction, in favour of the respondents. The dispute is about an access.

¶15

Shri Pangam, the learned Counsel for the respondent no. 1 states that the decree, which is of the year 2015, has already been executed and the gate, which was there on the access has been opened.

¶16

Shri Lotlikar, the learned Senior Counsel for the applicant states that the appeal may itself be expedited, in as much as, the

¶17

2 CA/96/2016

¶18

respondent no. 1 is claiming right of way to his private property, through the property of the temple, of which, he is a mahajan.

¶19

Be that as it may, considering the fact that the decree is of the year 2015 and the mandatory part of the decree is already executed, way back on 13.02.2015, no case for grant of stay is made.

¶20

The application is disposed of. The Second Appeal be added to the final hearing board, if it is otherwise ready.

¶21

C. V. BHADANG, J.

¶22

EV

Shri Govindnath Develaya, through Const. Attorney Krishna Vitthal Naik. v. Ramesh Fondu Borkar and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Govindnath Develaya, through Const. Attorney Krishna Vitthal Naik. v. Ramesh Fondu Borkar and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Teofilo Dsouza., Vs Anant Pansekar.

Eduardo Travasso., Vs Santana D'Silva (Deceased) through Lrs.

Menina Dias E Fernandes., Vs Jose Inacio Fernandes and 3 Ors.

Mineira Nacional Limitada, Rep. by Mukesh M. Saglani and Anr., Vs Mina Dessai.

Datta Pundalik Naik (Dec) Thr. His Lrs., Vs Chandrakant Hira Ghanekar (Deceased) Thr. His Lrs.

Sebastian Cardozo Vs Abdul Khaleque Mani through Poa Peter Rebello