Bombay High Court
HARISHCHANDRA BEMTYA NAIK ALIAS KATKARI AND OTHERSversusMACHINDRA TUKARAI NAIK ALIAS KATKARI AND OTHERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The appellate court set aside the part of the interlocutory order that had partly allowed the urgent interim relief and disposed of the appeal, directing the lower court to decide the pending temporary injunction application expeditiously.
Summary
The appellants Harishchandra Bemtya Naik @ Katkari and others appealed against an interlocutory order dated 18 July 2026 that had partly allowed an urgent interim relief application (Exhibit‑8) in a civil suit. The respondents, who were the original plaintiffs, informed the court that they would withdraw the Exhibit‑8 application, prompting the appellate court to consider whether the order could be set aside. The appellate court held that, since the order was interlocutory and the application was being withdrawn, the part of the order that allowed the interim relief was set aside. It further directed the lower court to decide the pending temporary injunction application (Exhibit‑5) as quickly as possible, without expressing any view on the merits of the main suit. No costs were awarded and the interim application was declared disposed, effectively ending the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether an interlocutory order granting interim relief under Order 43 Rule 1R and Section 104 CPC is appealable and can be set aside on the withdrawal of the underlying application.
- Whether the appellate court should direct the lower court to expedite the hearing of a pending temporary injunction application.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 104
Subjects
- interim relief
- temporary injunction
- interlocutory order
- appeal under Order 43 Rule 1R
- Section 104 CPC
- mandatory injunction
- plaint amendment
Judgment
1 of 3 901.AO.822.2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.822 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6229 OF 2026
Harishchandra Bemtya Naik @ Katkari
and others Appellants
versus
Machindra Tukaram Naik @ Katkari
and others Respondents
_______
Mr.Prasad Dhakephalkar, Senior Advocate, i/by Mr.J.M.Joshi for Appellant.
Mr.Ashok Saraogi with Mr.Saurabh Butala, Mrs.Kalpana Chate, Mr.Parthraj Ware,
Mr.Bharat Shinde, Mr.Govind Mundhe, Mr.Vinod Kendre i/by Chate & Associates
for Respondents.
_______
CORAM : AARTI SATHE, J.
DATE : 18th August 2026
P.C.
1. This Appeal from Order under Order 43 Rule 1R read with Section
104 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 takes exception to the order dated 18 th
July 2026 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panvel, on
application filed below Exhibit-8, Exhibit-41 and Exhibit-44 by the Respondents
(original Plaintiffs) in Special Civil Suit No.292 of 2026, pursuant to which the
learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panvel by the order under challenge
dated 18th July 2026, partly allowed the application filed below Exhibit-8 for grant
of urgent ad-interim relief as per the submissions made in the application filed
Digitally signed
by MANISH
MANISH SURESHRAO
SURESHRAO THATTE below Exhibit-41 and Exhibit-44, and an adjournment was granted to the original
THATTE Date: 2026.08.18
17:20:32 +0530
Defendants to file reply to the applications filed below Exhibit-5 for temporary
M.S.Thatte
2 of 3 901.AO.822.2026.DOC
injunction and Exhibit-45 for amendment of the plaint and Exhibit-47 for
mandatory injunction.
2. After hearing the learned counsel on behalf of the parties for some time,
the learned counsel for Respondents (original Plaintiffs) has submitted that they
will withdraw the application before the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panvel
filed below Exhibit-8. In view thereof, since the order dated 18 th July 2026 is an
interlocutory order which has been passed on the application below Exhibit-8, the
said order stands set aside to the extent it partly allowed the application below
Exhibit-8.
3. Further, since the application filed below Exhibit-5 for temporary
injunction is also pending hearing before the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division,
Panvel for the purpose of temporary injunction, the learned Joint Civil Judge,
Senior Division, Panvel shall decide the aforesaid application for temporary
injunction as expeditiously as possible and pass appropriate orders thereon in
accordance with law.
4. It is clarified that this Court has not given any findings or delved into
the merits of the case and all contentions of the parties are expressly kept open in
respect of their submissions to be made before the Joint Civil Judge, Senior
Division, Panvel insofar as the application below Exhibit-5 for temporary
injunction is concerned.
5. Considering the aforesaid, this Court is of the view that further
adjudication of this Appeal from Order is not required. The Appeal from Order is
M.S.Thatte
3 of 3 901.AO.822.2026.DOC
disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs. The Interim Application does not
survive and stands disposed of.
(AARTI SATHE, J.)
M.S.Thatte
Checking your session…