Vardhaman Mohanlal Khabiya and Ors. v. Gulab Papabhai Hawaldar and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Jan 2025WP/912/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court; WRIT PETITION NO.912 OF 2024; Amit Borkar, J.; status-quo direction; order dated 9th November 2023; temporary injunction rejected by Trial Court; appeal allowed by Appellate Court; R.C.S.No.768/2023; measurement registration No.15430/2022; Survey No. 279/1; Survey No. 279/2; 98 ares; clause (2) restricted to suit property; writ petition disposed of; order modified 24 January 2025.

What did the court decide?

Clarification that clause (2) of the order dated 9th November 2023 is restricted relating to the suit property; with only this clarification, the writ petition stands disposed of. ¶¶20

Vardhaman Mohanlal Khabiya and Ors. vs Gulab Papabhai Hawaldar and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

26-wp-912-2024 modified.doc

¶2

Shabnoor

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.912 OF 2024

¶5

Vardhaman Mohanlal Khabiya & Ors. … Petitioners V/s. Gulab Papabhai Hawaldar & Ors. … Respondents

¶6

Mr. Sudhir Sadavarte for petitioners. Mr. Jaydeep Deo for respondents. Ms. Dhruti Kapadia, AGP for State.

¶7

CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : JANUARY 22, 2025

¶8

P.C.:

¶9

Respondent Nos.1 to 17 filed a suit for seeking declaration that the measurement registration bearing No.15430/2022 be declared as illegal and, further injunction restraining defendant No. 6 from sanctioning the map in furtherance of the said measurement, and restraining defendant Nos.1 to 4 from construction over Sr. No.279 without measurement as per consent of owners of Survey Nos. 279/1 and 279/2 is also sought.

¶10

In the said suit, respondent Nos.1 to 17 filed an application for temporary injunction restraining defendant No.6 from sanctioning the map in furtherance measurement No.15430/2022. The injunction is further sought restraining defendant Nos. 1 to 4 from constructing over Survey No.279.

¶11

¶12

26-wp-912-2024 modified.doc

¶13

In the said suit, the Trial Court rejected the application for temporary injunction and the Appellate Court passed following order:

¶14

“ORDER

¶15

1] The appeal stands allowed.

¶16

2] The plaintiffs and the defendants are directed to maintain status-quo in respect of title, nature of the land till judgment in R.C.S.No.768/2023.

¶17

3] The Suit R.C.S.No.768/2023 be decided within six (6) months.

¶18

4] Costs into cause.”

¶19

The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioners’ property is not suit property as admittedly the petitioners are owners of land bearing Survey No. 279/2 admeasuring 98 ares which is not shown as the subject matter of the suit in the schedule of the plaint.

¶20

It is, therefore, clarified that clause (2) of the order dated 9th November 2023 is restricted relating to the suit property. Only with this clarification, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶21

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)

¶22

Note:- This order is modified as per order dated 24 January 2025. Corrections are shown in italicize.

¶23

Vardhaman Mohanlal Khabiya and Ors. v. Gulab Papabhai Hawaldar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vardhaman Mohanlal Khabiya and Ors. v. Gulab Papabhai Hawaldar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mahatma Phule Co. Operative Credit Society Ltd. vs Mahatma Phule Bhavan Co. Op. Housing Society Ltd.

Sujata Ravindra Kamtam and Anr. vs the Divisional Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies and Ors.

Gaurav Ajitkumar Patil and Anr. vs Ajitkumar Bhikugonda Patil

Tata Motors Finance Limited vs Anwar Yousf Sayed

Neelkanth Heights Cooperative Housing Soc and Ors. vs Abhinav Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.

Shivbahadur Yadav vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Department of Co. Operation and Ors.