Iifl Capital Services Ltd., Thr Its Duly Authorized Representative v. Pukhraj Hanumandas Rathod and Others

Bombay HC1 Apr 2026WP/9023/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (2026:BHC-AUG:14005); IIFL Capital Services Ltd. v. Pukhraj Hanumandas Rathod & Ors., Writ Petition No.9023 of 2025; execution-stage disbursement dispute in Special Darkhast No.4 of 2025; pending Regular Civil Appeal No.49 of 2024 before Principal District Judge; appeal to be decided within four weeks; interim relief of 23.7.2025 continued till appeal disposal; disbursement deferred to final decision in appeal.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the learned District Judge to decide Regular Civil Appeal No.49 of 2024 within four weeks; interim relief granted on 23.7.2025 to continue till disposal of the appeal; disbursement of the amount to be made as per the final decision in the appeal. ¶¶16

Iifl Capital Services Ltd., Thr Its Duly Authorized Representative vs Pukhraj Hanumandas Rathod and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the amount directed to be released to the respondent/decree holder under the impugned order should be disbursed while Regular Civil Appeal No.49 of 2024 against the decree remains pending before the Principal District Judge.

¶¶12

Court's answer

Given the state of the pending appeal, it would be in the interest of the parties for the Appellate Court to decide the pending appeal expeditiously and then pass further order as to disbursement of the amount.

¶¶15

Ratio / Principle

Without delving into the merits of the contentions raised by the parties, the writ petition stands disposed of with directions to the learned District Judge to decide Regular Civil Appeal No.49 of 2024 within a period of four weeks.

¶¶16

Key takeaways

The interim relief granted by this Court vide order dated 23.7.2025 shall continue to operate till disposal of the appeal.ratio¶¶16
Disbursement of the amount shall be made as per the final decision in the appeal.ratio¶¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order dated 16.7.2025 of the Civil Judge S.D., Bhusawal in Special Darkhast No.4 of 2025 (allowing the respondent/decree holder's application Exhibit 6, rejecting the J.D./petitioner's application Exhibit 18, and directing release of the amount to the decree holder) challenged by writ petition. Since Regular Civil Appeal No.49 of 2024 against the decree is pending before the Principal District Judge with the petitioner/appellant's arguments complete, the Court disposed of the petition without entering the merits, directed the District Judge to decide the appeal within four weeks, ordered the interim relief granted on 23.7.2025 to continue till disposal of the appeal, and deferred disbursement of the amount to the final decision in the appeal.

¶1

wp 9023.25.odt

¶2

2026:BHC-AUG:14005

¶3

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

956 WRIT PETITION NO.9023 OF 2025

¶6

Iifl Capital Services Ltd., Thr Its Duly Authorized Representative VERSUS

¶7

Pukhraj Hanumandas Rathod And Others

¶8

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S.S. Kulkarni h/f R.S. Kulkarni Advocate for Respondents : Mr. S.B. Bhapkar & B.R. Rathod

¶9

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. Dated : April 01, 2026

¶10

PER COURT :-

¶11

Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties.

¶12

Present writ petition takes exception to the order dated 16.7.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge S.D. Bhusawal in Special Darkhast No.4 of 2025 below Exhibit 6 and 18. By impugned order, application Exhibit 6 filed by the respondent is allowed, whereas an application Exhibit 18 filed by J.D. (petitioner) is rejected and directions are given to release the amount in favour of the respondent/decree holder.

¶13

Mr. Kulkarni, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner informs that the RCA No.49 of 2024 filed against the decree is pending before Principal District Judge. The petitioner/appellant has already completed his arguments and

¶14

2 wp 9023.25.odt

¶15

matter is pending for t arguments of respondent. Looking to aforesaid aspects of matter, it would be in the interest of parties, if the Appellate Court decides pending appeal expeditiously and then pass further order as to disbursement of the amount.

¶16

In result, without delving into merits of contentions raised by the parties, writ petition stands disposed off with directions to the learned District Judge to decide the Regular Civil Appeal No.49 of 2024 within a period of four (4) weeks from today. Parties to co-operate for early disposal of the appeal. The interim relief, granted by this Court vide order dated 23.7.2025 shall continue to operate till disposal of the appeal. Disbursement of the amount be made as per final decision in the appeal.

¶17

( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. )

¶18

AAA

Iifl Capital Services Ltd., Thr Its Duly Authorized Representative v. Pukhraj Hanumandas Rathod and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iifl Capital Services Ltd., Thr Its Duly Authorized Representative v. Pukhraj Hanumandas Rathod and Others

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

Trivenibai Sadashiv Vithore vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary Rural Dev. Dept. and Others

Vikrant Shrikrushna Deshmukh vs Chikhali Urban Co. Operative Bank Ltd. Chilhali and Others

Shaikh Mahemmud Shaikh Akbar vs Mohammad Anis Gulam Rasul

Yogesh Gajanan Pathak and Another vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shrimant Mahadaya Malbhage and Others vs Shivkant Mahadaya Malbhage and Others

Shrirang Dattatray Khirsagar vs Shantabai Dattatray Kshirsagar and Others