The High Court disposed of the appeal against the refusal of ad-interim relief by directing the trial court to expedite and finally decide the pending notice of motion in the underlying suit, while maintaining status-quo.
Notice of motion to be decided finally within three weeks; status-quo maintained.
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.
Chitra Sonawane. 1 910-AO-282-24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Appeal from Order No.282 of 2024
a/w
Interim Application No.7434 of 2924
.… Nishikant Digambar Subhedar Appellant. Vs. MCGM & Anr. .... Respondents.
Ms Sunita D. Sonawane for appellant. Ms Smita V. Tondwalkar for MCGM. Mr JS Kini i/by Sapna Krishnappa for Intervenor.
Coram : R. N. Laddha, J. Date : 4 April 2024.
P.C. :
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the Corporation.
Chitra Sonawane. 2 910-AO-282-24.doc
of the impugned order, it would be appropriate that the learned trial court considers and decides the notice of motion No.437 of 2024 in Suit No.390 of 2024 finally.
Nishikant Digambar Subhedar
MCGM
R. N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
