Bombay High Court
SURESH SUNDAR KAMBLEversusSUBHASH SUNDAR KAMBLE AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHARMILA U DESHMUKH
Holding
Since no permanent third‑party rights were created and the property was only on a leave‑and‑license basis, the order dismissing the notice of motion stands and the appeal is disposed.
Summary
The appellant, Suresh Sundar Kamble, appealed against the trial court's order dismissing his notice of motion seeking the appointment of a court receiver and an injunction to prevent creation of third‑party rights over a property. The respondents clarified that they do not intend to sell the property and that it has only been granted on a leave‑and‑license basis, not creating any permanent third‑party interest. The High Court observed that the material on record shows no creation of permanent third‑party rights and therefore saw no ground to interfere with the dismissal of the notice of motion. The Court directed the trial court to decide the pending suit for recovery of possession expeditiously and on its merits, without being influenced by the appealed order. Both the appeal and the related interim application were consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the dismissal of the notice of motion seeking a court receiver and an injunction should be set aside given the leave‑and‑license arrangement.
- Whether any permanent third‑party rights were created that would warrant an injunction.
Subjects
- Court receiver
- Injunction
- Leave and license
- Third party rights
- Recovery of possession
- Appellate jurisdiction
- Interim application
Judgment
29-AO-1015-2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1015 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1368 OF 2019
IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1015 OF 2023
Suresh Sundar Kamble ...Applicant/
Appellant
Versus
Subhash Sundar Kamble Thr. Legal Heirs And Ors ...Respondents
——————
Mr. Abhishek Tripathi a/w Mr. Bharat Tiwari, for the Appellant.
Mr. S.K.Dubey a/w Mr. A.K.Upadhyay, for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
——————
CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : JULY 27, 2026
P. C. :
1. The present Appeal From Order has been preferred against the
order dated 13th August, 2019, dismissing the Plaintiff’s Notice of
Motion seeking the appointment of a Court Receiver and an injunction
against creating any third party rights.
2. Upon query by this Court, learned counsel for the Respondents
submits that they do not intend to sell the property to any third party.
3. It is clarified that giving the property on a leave and license basis
Arya 1 of 2
29-AO-1015-2023.doc
is not restrained. As the Notice of Motion was dismissed on 13 th
August, 2019, and the material placed on record only demonstrates
that the property was given on a leave and license basis and no
permanent third party rights have been created by way of sale, this
Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.
4. As the suit has been filed seeking recovery of possession, the
Trial Court is requested to decide the suit expeditiously.
5. Learned counsel for the parties agree to co-operate with the
Trial Court for early disposal of the suit. The Trial Court to decide the
suit on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made in the
impugned order dated 13th August, 2019. The Appeal From Order
stands disposed of.
6. Interim Application does not survive for consideration and
stands disposed of.
[SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]
Arya 2 of 2
Checking your session…