Bombay High Court
HARISHCHANDRA BEMTYA NAIK ALIAS KATKARI AND OTHERSversusMACHINDRA TUKARAI NAIK ALIAS KATKARI AND OTHERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The High Court set aside the part of the interlocutory order that partly allowed the interim application and disposed of the appeal, holding that no further adjudication was required.
Summary
The appellants Harishchandra Bemtya Naik @ Katkari and others appealed an order dated 18 July 2026 of the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panvel, which had partly allowed an interim application (Exhibit‑8) for urgent relief and adjourned the filing of a reply to other applications. During the hearing, the respondents (original plaintiffs) indicated they would withdraw the Exhibit‑8 application, prompting the High Court to set aside the part of the order that had granted the interim relief. The Court clarified that it had not examined the merits of the pending temporary injunction application (Exhibit‑5) and directed the lower court to decide it expeditiously. It further stated that no findings on the substantive issues were made and that the appeal required no further adjudication. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of without costs and the interim application was deemed not to survive.
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.
- Whether the appeal from the interlocutory order should be dismissed or disposed of without further hearing.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 104
Subjects
- interlocutory order
- appeal under Order 43 Rule 1R
- Section 104 CPC
- interim relief
- temporary injunction
- set aside
- disposal of appeal
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
below Exhibit-41 and Exhibit-44, and an adjournment was granted to the original
by MANISH
MANISH SURESHRAO
SURESHRAO THATTE
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…