Disposed

Mohammed Ali Mumtaz Ali Sayyed v. Moin Ilias Khatik and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Feb 2024WP/6751/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged a District Judge's order rejecting a status quo application. The High Court expedited the pending civil appeal, directed disposal within six months, extended the existing status quo, and permitted respondents to apply based on Supreme Court law.

What did the court decide?

Expeditied hearing of regular civil appeal; disposal directed within six months; status quo extended; respondents allowed to file application based on Atma Ram precedent.

Mohammed Ali Mumtaz Ali Sayyed Vs Moin Ilias Khatik and Anr. — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

KVM

¶2

1/4

¶3

15 - WP 6751 OF 2023.doc

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

KANCHAN Digitally signed byKANCHAN VINOD VINOD MAYEKAR MAYEKAR Date: 2024.02.2317:03:40 +0530

¶6

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 6751 OF 2023

¶8

Mohammed Ali Mumtaz Ali Sayyed….. Petitioner

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

Moin Ilias Khatik & Anr.

¶11

….. Respondents

¶12

Ms.Chaitali Bhogle i/b. Mr.Vivekanand Krishnan for the
Petitioner.

¶13

Ms.Rukhmini Khairnar i/b. Mr.Pramod N.Joshi for the
Respondents.

¶14

CORAM: RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
 DATE : 22 FEBRUARY, 2024

¶15

P.C. :-

¶16

This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 28

¶17

April, 2023 passed by the District Judge in a Regular Civil Appeal

¶18

No. 48 of 2023, thereby rejecting the application Ex.13.

¶19

2. By an application Ex.13, the petitioner (original plaintiff)

¶20

had sought to continue a status quo order.

¶21

3. It is the case of the original defendant that after the decree

¶22

KVM

¶23

2/4

¶24

15 - WP 6751 OF 2023.doc

¶25

was passed by the Trial Court, the same was executed. However,
the original plaintiff by force has entered into the suit premises
and is holding over the suit premises. She further submits that
her client has already filed a criminal case for tresspass against
the original plaintiff.

¶26

4. The appeal against the original decree is pending before the District Court at Nashik.

¶27

5.She also further submitted that her client intend to file an
application based on the judgment of Supreme Court in case of
Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. vs. Federal Motors (P) Ltd.
reported in (2005) 1 SCC 705.

¶28

6. Heard both the sides. Suffice will be the purpose if the

¶29

hearing of the Regular Civil Appeal No. 48 of 2023 is expedited.

¶30

7. The present writ petition is disposed of with following

¶31

KVM

¶32

3/4

¶33

15 - WP 6751 OF 2023.doc

¶34

directions :-

¶35

(i)The hearing of the Regular Civil Appeal No.
48 of 2023 is expedited.

¶36

(ii)The District Judge at Nashik will make an
endevour to dispose of the Regular Civil Appeal
No. 48 of 2023 as early as possible and in any case

¶37

within a period of six months from today.

¶38

(iii)The status quo granted by this Court on 9
June, 2023 in Writ Petition No. 6751 of 2023 is
further extended till the hearing and final disposal
of the Regular Civil Appeal No. 48 of 2023.

¶39

(iv)The respondents are at liberty to file an
application if they so desire as per the ratio laid
down by the Supreme Court in case of Atma Ram

¶40

Properties (P) Ltd. (supra) in Regular Civil Appeal
No. 48 of 2023.

¶41

KVM

¶42

4/4

¶43

15 - WP 6751 OF 2023.doc

¶44

(v)The said application if preferred by the
original defendant, to be decided on its own

¶45

merits after giving an opportunity to the original

¶46

plaintiff to file its reply and he be heard while

¶47

deciding the said application.

¶48

(vi)All contentions of the parties are kept open.

¶49

[RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]

Mohammed Ali Mumtaz Ali Sayyed v. Moin Ilias Khatik and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Ali Mumtaz Ali Sayyed v. Moin Ilias Khatik and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Purnima Ashok Shah and Anr. Vs Anand Jayant Vashi and Ors.

The Madhavnagar Co-Operative Housing Society Limited Vs Laherilal Jain

Smt. Krushnabai Dattatray Mote (Since Deceased) Shri. Vishnu Dattatray Mote and Ors. Vs Pradeep Anant Deshpande and Ors.

Mr. Devashish Gaurang Behera Vs Mrs. Hita Devashish Behera

Sou. Pritee Swapnil Supekar Vs Shri. Swapnil Suresh Supekar

Smt. Kumud Sharad Palande Vs Ms. Roma Kedar Palande and Ors.