This court disposed of a writ petition by observing that reasoning in an impugned interim order regarding a regular civil suit does not affect the legal rights of parties on merits in a pending appeal directed to be decided independently.
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.
(5)-WP-798-17 (corrected).doc . Corrected pursuant to speaking to minutes of the order dated 31st January, 2022
Digitally signed by BALAJI BALAJIGOVINDRAO GOVINDRAOPANCHAL PANCHAL Date: 2022.02.01 15:57:37 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.798 OF 2017
Shri. Dattatraya Rangnath Mali
alias Thorat and Ors. ..Petitioners
Versus
Smt. Shakuntala Balkrishna alias Balu
alias Shrikrishna Thorat and Ors. ..Respondents
Mr. Vivek V. Salunke, for the Petitioners.
Mr. Girish R. Agrawal, for Respondent Nos.1 to 8.
Mr. Milind M. Sathaye, for Respondent Nos.9(a) to 9(e) & 9(g).
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.
DATE : 24th JANUARY, 2022
P.C.
1.Heard Mr. Vivek Salunke, learned counsel for the
petitioners/decree holders in Regular Civil Suit No.62 of 2012, who
has no objection to the operative order viz. allowing application
Exh.24 and permitting third party to be added, however, has
objected only to the findings/reasoning recorded in paragraphs 12,
13 and 14. According to him, said observation jeopardizes his case
on merit.
2. In this backdrop, needless to clarify that petition can be
disposed of with an observation that the reasoning mentioned in
paragraphs 12, 13 and 14 are restricted only to the extent of
BGP. 1 o f 2
(5)-WP-798-17 (corrected).doc . Corrected pursuant to speaking to minutes of the order dated 31st January, 2022 consideration of issue in Exh.24. Said reasoning shall not be affecting legal rights of the parties including petitioners on the merits in the pending Appeal No.157 of 2013. The said apeal is directed to be decided without being influenced by the findings referred above i.e. recorded in paragraphs 12, 13 and 14 of the impugned order.
3.As such, petition stands disposed of.
[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]
2 o f 2
BGP.
Shri. Dattatraya Rangnath Mali alias Thorat and Ors.
Smt. Shakuntala Balkrishna alias Balu alias Shrikrishna Thorat and Ors.
Nitin W. Sambre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court