This court dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable, directing parties to file an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(t) CPC. It granted extension of ad-interim relief for two weeks due to pending protection order.
Writ petition dismissed; ad-interim protection continued for two weeks.
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.
44-wp1171-2023.doc
VRJ
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1171 OF 2023
VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV
Digitally signed byVAIBHAV RAMESHJADHAVDate: 2023.12.1318:57:45 +0530
Vishnu Nivrutti Gaikwad Since Deceased Through His Legal Heirs and Ors. … Petitioners V/s. Ramdas Vishnu Gaikwad & Anr. … Respondents
Mr. Rajaram V. Bansode for the petitioners. Mr. Dilip Bodake for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : DECEMBER 13, 2023
P.C.:
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging an impugned order under Order 41 Rule 19 CPC is maintainable when Order 43 Rule 1(t) CPC provides for an appeal.
Whether the ad-interim protection granted on 27th January 2023 shall continue post-dismissal of the writ petition.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Vishnu Nivrutti Gaikwad Since Deceased Through His Legal Heirs and Ors.
Ramdas Vishnu Gaikwad
Amit Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
