Bombay High CourtWP/4170/2017dispossed offdismiss for default

Bharat Swarupchand Chaware Thr. P.O.A. Sachin Ashok Chaware v. Balkisan Dhansukh Gadodiya And Another

2018-03-08Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.S. Chandurkar2 pages

13-WP-4170-17 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO.4170 OF 2017 Bharat Swarupchand Chaware, Budhana, Thr. POA Sachin Ashok Chawre, Buldhana -vsBalisan Dhansukh Gadodiya, Buldhana and Anr. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.

or directions and Registrar's orders.

Shri A. P. Chaware, Advocate for petitioner.

Shri S. A. Mohta, Advocate for respondents.

CORAM : A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.

DATE : March 08, 2018 The petitioner who is the original plaintiff is aggrieved by the order passed by the trial Court rejecting the application for grant of temporary injunction so as to restrain the respondents-defendants from demolishing the wall standing on plot No.183. The appeal filed by the petitioner has also been dismissed.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties it is found that the defendants in paragraph No.13 of their reply filed to the application for grant of temporary injunction have taken a stand that after purchasing the property on 03/09/2016 they had started dismantling the structure from 09/09/2016. By the time the suit was filed on 20/09/2016, major part of the construction standing on plot No.183 was demolished.

Considering the fact that the Courts have refused to grant any temporary injunction in favour of the

13-WP-4170-17 2/2 petitioner coupled with the stand taken in paragraph 13 of the reply, I find that considering the prayer for temporary injunction at this stage in the light of aforesaid plea would not serve any useful purpose. Instead the parties can be directed to maintain status quo as of today during pendency of the suit so that the nature of the suit property is not changed.

Hence by directing the parties to the suit to maintain status quo as of today till disposal of the suit, the writ petition is disposed of. Needless to state that it is open for the parties to agitate their respective contentions on merits before the trial Court. The proceedings in R.C.S. No.38/2016 are expedited. No order as to costs.

JUDGE Asmita