Mr. Filastro Cardozo And ANR., v. Mrs. Mitzi Cardozo.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 466 OF 2017 MR. FILASTRO CARDOZO AND ANR., ... Petitioners

Versus

MRS. MITZI CARDOZO.

... Respondent Mr. Vivek Angelo Rodrigues, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S. Redkar, Advocate for the respondent.

Coram:- C. V. BHADANG, J.

Date:- 16th June, 2017 P.C.

On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, I do not find that any case for interference is made out as the work of painting of house and compound wall and replacing of Mangalore tiles, which was permitted by the impugned order, has already been completed. The learned Counsel for the petitioners states that this Court may clarify that the impugned order shall not come in the way of the learned Trial Court in deciding the application for breach of injunction.

2. It is evident that the impugned order only pertains to an application for permission, filed by the respondent, to paint her house and the compound wall and to replace Mangalore tiles. The substantive relief of Temporary Injunction, restraining the respondent from doing any further construction, is not affected

WP/466/2017 by the impugned order.

3. With this, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Parties to co-operate for expeditious disposal of the suit. C. V. BHADANG, J.

SMA