SHAIKH NASER SHAIKH IBRAHIMversusSHAIKH AYAS SHAIKH AFSAR THROUGH GPA ANIL SHANTILAL CHORDIYA

2026:BHC-AUG:40013

                                                     (1)                  929-WP-11354-2024


                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                   929 WRIT PETITION NO. 11354 OF 2024

                                         Shaikh Naser Shaikh Ibrahim
                                                   VERSUS
                         Shaikh Ayas Shaikh Afsar Through Gpa Anil Shantilal Chordiya
                                                      WITH
                                     CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5228 OF 2026
                                              IN WP-11354-2024
                                   Shaikh Fayyaz Shaikh Ayyaz And Others
                                                   VERSUS
                                    Shaikh Naser Shaikh Ibrahim
                                                  …..
           Mr. Anil S. Bajaj, Advocate for the Petitioner.
           Mr. S. S. Khivansara, Advocate for Appellant through V. C.
                                                  …..

                                                  CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.


                                                  DATE      : SEPTEMBER 1, 2026.

           PC :-

           1.        The petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings in Regular Civil Suit

           No.64 of 2023 filed by the respondents in the Court of learned Joint Civil

           Judge, Junior Division, Aurangabad. In the said Suit, an application under

           Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Criminal

           Procedure came to be filed by the plaintiffs against the petitioner, seeking a

           temporary injunction.



           Kiran Kawre
                                         (2)                   929-WP-11354-2024


2.        The said application was allowed. Being dissatisfied with the order, the

petitioner approached the District Court by filing Miscellaneous Civil Appeal

No.129 of 2023. However, by the impugned order dated 18 June 2024, the

learned District Judge-4, Aurangabad, recorded his disinclination to interfere

with the order impugned therein.

3.        Thus, the petitioner has challenged both the orders, i.e., the order

granting the injunction and the order confirming the said injunction, in the

present petition. The suit is of the year 2023. The application for temporary

injunction was tested only on three parameters, i.e., prima facie case, balance

of convenience and irreparable loss. On that count, the injunction was

imposed and was subsequently confirmed. As it could be seen that the first

injunction order has been operating since August 2023.

4.        In view of this, I am of the considered view that instead of going into

merits of case, the suit could be expedited. However, in the interest of justice,

it is necessary to request the trial Court to conclude the suit proceedings in a

time-bound manner.

5.        Mr. Bajaj, learned advocate for the petitioner, would submit that in fact

the suit proceedings itself are bogus and frivolous. He also objects to the

maintainability of the suit. His apprehension is that the findings recorded by

the trial Court as also by the First Appellate Court must not influence the trial.

Kiran Kawre
                                          (3)                   929-WP-11354-2024


6.        I do not have any reason to disagree with such submissions. In view of

this, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a request to the

learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad to conclude the suit trial as

expeditiously as possible and, in any event, within a period of one year from

today. It is clarified that any observations marked by the trial Court while

deciding the temporary injunction application and the observations made by

the First Appellate Court while deciding the Miscellaneous Civil Appeal are

restricted to the extent of the Exhibit – 5 application only.

7.        All contentions of the parties are kept open.

8.        The petitioner is at liberty to demonstrate how the plaint is liable to be

rejected/returned and even demonstrate that the suit is not maintainable. The

trial Court shall decide the suit and such application, if filed, on its own

merits.

9.        With this, the writ petition stands disposed of.



                                                 [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]




Kiran Kawre