Disposed¶16

Vijay Karbhari Shinde and Another v. National Highway Authority through Its General Manager and Project Director and Others

Bombay HC8 Dec 2025WP/4266/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench; Writ Petition No. 4266 of 2023; decided 08.12.2025 by Siddheshwar S. Thombre, J. (single judge, per court); Vijay Karbhari Shinde and another v. National Highway Authority through its General Manager and Project Director and others. Keywords: enforcement of interim/temporary injunction; obstruction of approach way; construction completed during pendency of suit (R.C.S. No.434/2022); Misc. Civil Appeal No.176 of 2022 partly allowed; remedy for breach or violation of injunction order under Order XXXIX Rule 2-A CPC; writ petition disposed with liberty, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings under Order XXXIX Rule 2-A of the Civil Procedure Code. ¶16

Vijay Karbhari Shinde and Another Vs National Highway Authority through Its General Manager and Project Director and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 14 WP 4266-2023.odt

¶2

2025:BHC-AUG:34550

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

14 WRIT PETITION NO. 4266 OF 2023

¶5

VIJAY KARBHARI SHINDE AND ANOTHER VERSUS

¶6

NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER AND PROJECT DIRECTOR AND OTHERS

¶7

Mr. Avinash M. Nagarkar – Advocate for Petitioners Mr. V.T. Sakolkar – Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr. D.B. Gaikwad – Advocate for Respondent No.2 Mr. V.S. Badakh – AGP for Respondent Nos.4 and 5, State

¶8

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 08.12.2025

¶9

PER COURT :

¶10

Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties.

¶11

The petitioners challenge the judgment and order dated 31.01.2023 passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No.176 of 2022 below Exhibit 18 by the learned District Judge–3, Ahmednagar, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioners came to be partly allowed and order dated 14.11.2022 passed below Exhibit 5 by the learned Trial Court in R.C.S. No.434/2022 was quashed and set aside.

¶12

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that while passing the order under challenge, the appellate Court has specifically observed in clause–3 that the respondents or anybody claiming through them are

¶13

2 14 WP 4266-2023.odt

¶14

temporary restrained from obstructing the approach way of the plaintiff till the decision of the suit. He further submits that during the pendency of the suit, the respondents have already completed the construction and they are causing total obstruction to the petitioners, who are in possession of the suit property including non–agricultural land as well as agricultural land.

¶15

Learned A.G.P. and learned Counsel for the respective respondents submit that, in case of breach of the obligation or violation of the injunction order, the petitioners are required to file appropriate proceedings under Order XXXIX Rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶16

Considering the submissions and on perusal of the order dated 31.01.2023 passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No.176 of 2022 below Exhibit 18 by the learned District Judge–3, Ahmednagar, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings under Order XXXIX Rule 2-A of the Civil Procedure Code.

¶17

No order as to costs.

¶18

[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE

¶19

Pooja Kale/

Vijay Karbhari Shinde and Another v. National Highway Authority through Its General Manager and Project Director and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Karbhari Shinde and Another v. National Highway Authority through Its General Manager and Project Director and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Madhavrao Patil and Others Vs Dnyandeo Rambhau Zondge and Others

The Municipal Council Osmanabad through Its Chief Officer Harikalyan Janardhan Yelgatte Vs Anjanabai Hanmant Kamble and Another

Dhudkabai Bhaga Patil Vs Dhanraj Dharma Patil and Others

Gayabai Girdar Bhil Since Deceased through Her Lrs Yuvraj Girdhar Bhil and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Chitralekha Chandrasen Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Bhausaheb Balaji Patole Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others