← Library
Bombay High CourtAO/79/2014dispossed offdismiss for default

Shri Nagesh S/O Rajesh Dubey And Antoher v. Shri Bharatdas S/O Koushaldas Vaishnav And Others

2015-01-28Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 ao79.14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

APPEAL AGAINST ORDER NO.79 OF 2014 (Shri Nagesh s/o Rajesh Dubey and another ..vs.. Shri Bharatdas s/o Koushaldas Vaishnav and others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : Z.A. HAQ, J.

DATED : 28-01-2015 Heard Shri P.R. Puri, the learned Advocate for the appellants and Shri I.S. Charlewar, the learned Advocate for the respondent No.1.

2.

This appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of the Civil Procedure Code is filed by the appellants challenging the order passed by the trial Court below Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 131 on 26-6-2014 directing all the parties to the suit and the proposed parties to maintain status quo. The submission on behalf of the appellants is that when the impugned order was passed, the appellants were not impleaded as party to the civil suit and they were served only with notice and not the suit summons and pursuant to the notice, they filed reply (Exhibit 146). The learned Advocate for the appellants as well as the learned Advocate for the respondent No.1 are not in a position to point out the date on which the appellants were impleaded as party to the civil suit.

2 ao79.14 Considering the directions given by the learned trial Judge that proposed parties shall maintain the status quo, the appellants are permitted to file proper application before the trial Court for modification of the order of injunction, if so advised.

3.

With these observations, the appeal is disposed. No costs.

JUDGE pma