Bombay High Court

UNION OF INDIA THR THR DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICERversusYogesh Behram Anklesaria

Decided: 18 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has a statutory remedy of appeal under Order XLIII of the CPC.

Summary

The Union of India filed a writ petition challenging a civil court order that granted an interim injunction restraining it from acting on a notice issued under the Cantonments Act, 2006 in a suit filed by the respondents. The petition argued that the injunction was improper, but the High Court noted that the petitioner has a statutory remedy to appeal the order under Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Since an appeal is available, the Court found no justification to entertain the writ petition. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the Court allowing the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned order. The decision rests on the principle that a statutory appeal bars the maintenance of a parallel writ petition.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition challenging an interim injunction is maintainable when a statutory appeal under Order XLIII CPC is available

Legislation cited

Cantonments Act — s. 2006
Code of Civil Procedure — s. Order XLIII

Subjects

interim injunction
statutory appeal
writ petition
maintainability
Cantonments Act
Code of Civil Procedure

Judgment

                                                                         11 WP-12162-26.DOC

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 12162 OF 2026

                   Union of India                                          ..Petitioner

                           Versus

                   Yogesh Behram Anklesaria & anr.                      …Respondents


                   Dr. G R Sharma, a/w Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Mr. Sandeep
                         Raman, Mr. Rushikesh Bhadre, for the Petitioner/UOI.

                   Mr. K J Presswalla, a/w Mr. Tushad Kakalia, Mr. Sandeep
                        Goyal, i/b Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe, for
                        the Respondent No.2.


                                               CORAM :       N. J. JAMADAR, J.
SAINATH
SANJAY
                                               DATE    :     18th SEPTEMBER 2026
BODKHE
Digitally signed
by SAINATH
SANJAY BODKHE
Date: 2026.09.19
16:34:52 +0530
                   P.C.:

                   1.      Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

                   2.      The challenge in this petition is to the order passed by the

                   Civil Court, Pune on an application for interim injunction

                   restraining the petitioner from acting upon the notice dated 23 rd

                   December, 2025, purportedly issued under the provisions of the

                   Cantonments Act, 2006 in Regular Civil Suit No. 1424/2019

                   instituted by the respondents.

                   3.      The petitioner has an efficacious statutory remedy of filing

                   an appeal against the impugned order granting injunction,


                   SAINATH, PA                         1/2
                                                    11 WP-12162-26.DOC

under the provisions of Order XLIII of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908. There is no justifiable reason to entertain the

petition despite the availability of the statutory remedy of

appeal.

4.      Thus, the Writ Petition stands disposed with liberty to the

petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned order.



                                         [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




SAINATH, PA                        2/2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.