Bombay High Court

RANJANA SURENDRA SANGHAVIversusBEENA VULHAS YARGOP

Decided: 29 September 2026
Disposal: Dismissed

Holding

The petition to restrain removal of articles was dismissed as there was no case for interference without a stay of the decree.

Summary

The petitioner, Ranjana Surendra Sanghavi, was a tenant from whom an eviction decree was passed. An appeal against the decree is pending, but the appellate court did not grant a stay. Consequently, the executing court enforced the decree and handed possession of the premises to the decree holder. The petitioner filed a writ application seeking to restrain the decree holder from removing articles that remained in the premises. The court held that, in the absence of a stay, the executing court was entitled to carry out the decree and there was no ground to interfere. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate remedy when an eviction decree is being executed while an appeal is pending but no stay has been granted?

Subjects

eviction
tenancy
execution of decree
stay of decree
writ petition
civil appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                      WRIT PETITION NO. 12700 OF 2026


Ranjana Surendra Sanghavi                                        .. Petitioner

            Vs.
Beena Ulhas Yagrop                                            .. Respondents


Adv. Ansh Karnawat, for the Petitioner.

                                  CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
                                  Date : 29th SEPTEMBER 2026

P.C. :


1.       The Petitioner was a tenant of the suit premises, against whom a

decree of eviction was passed.        The Appeal against the said decree is

pending consideration. However, the Appellate Court has not granted a stay

to the decree. In the mean time, the Executing Court has executed the

decree, and possession of the suit premises has been handed over to the

decree holder.

2.       The Petitioner has filed an application seeking to restrain the decree

holder from removing the articles lying in the suit premises. Since the

Appellate Court has not granted a stay to the decree in the pending appeal,

the executing Court has to executed the decree. Consequently, the articles

                                       1/2
9.WP.12700.2026.doc                                            Sufiyan Syed - PA
lying in the tenanted premises are required to be removed.           Thus, the

objections raised by the Petitioner has been rightly turned down by the

Executing Court.

3.     No case is made out for interference. The Petition is dismissed.




                                                (ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.)




                                     2/2
9.WP.12700.2026.doc                                           Sufiyan Syed - PA

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

Ansh Karnawat