Bombay High Court

ANIL SHIVRAM AMBRE AND ORSversusVIMAL PROPERTIES AND ASSOCIATES AND ORS

Decided: 31 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The petitioners have a statutory right of appeal under Order XLIII Rule 7(r) of the CPC, and the petition is disposed with liberty to file such an appeal limited to the specific issue.

Summary

The petitioners sought modification of an earlier order passed by this Court while a suit was pending, but the City Civil Court declined to vary that order. They contended that they possessed a statutory right of appeal under Order XLIII Rule 7(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Court examined whether such a remedy was available and concluded that the petitioners indeed have an efficacious statutory appeal. Consequently, the petition was disposed, but the Court granted the petitioners liberty to file an appeal limited to the specific rejection of their prayer to change respondent No. 7 developer. No further relief was granted in the writ petition itself.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioners have a statutory right of appeal under Order XLIII Rule 7(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the City Civil Court's order.
Whether the petition can be disposed with liberty to appeal only to the extent of the rejection of the prayer to change respondent No. 7 developer.

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. Order XLIII Rule 7(r)

Subjects

Statutory appeal
Civil Procedure
Order modification
Writ petition
Code of Civil Procedure

Judgment

                                                                       20-WP9790-2026.DOC

                                                                                  Santosh

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 9790 OF 2026

                      Anil Shivram Ambre And Ors                           ...Petitioners
                                        Versus
                      Vimal Properties And Associates And Ors            …Respondents

                      Mr. V. H. Narvekar, for the Petitioners.
                      Mr. Ameya Tamhane, for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.

                                                        CORAM:       N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                                                        DATED:       31st AUGUST, 2026
SANTOSH
SUBHASH               PC:-
KULKARNI
Digitally signed by
SANTOSH SUBHASH
KULKARNI
Date: 2026.09.02
                      1.     Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners.
10:02:29 +0530




                      2.     The petitioners have an efficacious remedy of statutory

                      appeal under Order XLIII Rule 7(r) of the Code of Civil

                      Procedure, 1908 as the impugned order is passed by the City

                      Civil Court declining to very an earlier order passed by this

                      Court while the suit was pending before this Court, in

                      modification of an earlier ad interim order.


                      3.     The petition stands disposed with liberty to file an appeal

                      against the impugned order to the extent of rejection of the

                      prayer to change the respondent No.7 developer.


                                                                 [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]


                                                     1/1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…