Disposed
Mr. Vijaykumar Vasantrao Hate v. Shri. Siddharth Chandrashekhar Rangnekar
Bombay HCWP/11901/2022
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY…
What the court decided
AI extract
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 28 wp 11901-22-c.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.11901 OF 2022
Mr.Vijaykumar Vasantrao Hate … Petitioner
Vs.
Mr.Siddharath Chandrashekhar Rangnekar … Respondent
Mr.Ranjeev Carvalho with Mr.Dikshak Soni i/by Mr.Mohnish S. Ghatge,
Advocates for the Petitioner.
Mr.Ketan Parikh i/by M/s K.R.Parikh & Co., Advocate for the Respondent.
CORAM :ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE :03 JULY, 2023.
P.C.:
1. After the matter is heard for some time, learned counsel for the Petitioner on instructions states that he is willing to withdraw the petition,
upon a statement from the learned counsel for the Respondent that
Petitioner’s ingress and egress from the main gate will not be obstructed
by the Respondent by blocking the main gate with his vehicles.
2. Mr.Ketan Parikh, learned counsel for the Respondent on
instructions states that since the property leased to the Respondent viz.
erstwhile CTS No.154/1 is on the left side of the main entrance,
1 of 2
Priya R. Soparkar
2 28 wp 11901-22-c.doc
Respondent’s vehicles enter the main gate and turn left towards the
leased property and the Respondent usually parks the vehicles in front of
the leased property. He submits that the Petitioner’s access to erstwhile
CTS Nos.154/2 and 154/3 is through the same main gate by turning
right towards the two erstwhile survey numbers and there is no way that
the Respondent’s vehicles parked in front of the leased premises on CTS
No.154/1 would block the entrance. He submits that however despite the
above position, he has instructions to state that Respondent’s vehicles will
not block the main gate.
3. In view of the above statement, the petition stands disposed.
4. Let R.A.E. suit No.476 of 2018 proceed as per schedule.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)
2 of 2
Priya R. Soparkar
Mr. Vijaykumar Vasantrao Hate
Mr. Siddharath Chandrashekhar Rangnekar
ABHAY AHUJA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court