The High Court of Bombay dismissed a writ petition challenging an interlocutory order. It held such an order is callable under Section 105 CPC and disposed of the writ while keeping contentions open for the substantive appeal.
Writ petition disposed of; contentions regarding nature of suit properties reserved for hearing.
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.
38-wp1781-2018.doc
VRJ
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1781 OF 2018
VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV
Digitally signed byVAIBHAV RAMESHJADHAV Date: 2024.12.0216:58:36 +0530
Ananda Keshav Yamgar & Ors. … Petitioners V/s. Sunil Tukaram Yamgar & Ors. … Respondents
Ms. Sairuchita Chowdhary h/f Mr. Shekhar Jagtap i/by J. Shekhar Associates for the petitioners.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : DECEMBER 2, 2024
P.C.:
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an interlocutory order is maintainable as a writ petition.
Vaibhav Ramesh Jadhav
Sunil Tukaram Yamgar
Amit Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
