Manohar Laxman Umap vs Dilip Vasudev Arrankalle And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 172 Bom

                                                         953WP7053.20
                                      1

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                   953 WRIT PETITION NO. 7053 OF 2020

          Manohar S/o. Laxman Umap,
          Age. 26 years, Occ. Labour,
          R/o. Bhatodi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.                  ...Applicant.

                           Versus

 1.       Dilip S/o. Vasudev Arrankalle,
          Age. 52 years, Occ. Agriculture and Service,
          R/o. Bhatodi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

 2.       Shridhar S/o. Bhalchandra Arrankalle,
          Age. 70 years, Occ. Agriculture,
          R/o. Bhatodi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

 3.       Govind S/o. Bhalchandra Arrankalle,
          Age. 75 years, Occ. Agriculture,
          R/o. Bhatodi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

 4.       Altaf S/o. Ibrahim Shaikh,
          Age. 45 years, Occ. Agriculture,
          R/o. Bhatodi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

 5.       Amin S/o. Isak Shaikh,
          Age. 55 years, Occ. Agriculture,
          R/o. Bhatodi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

 6.       Javed S/o. Shammu Shaikh,
          Age. 50 years, Occ. Agriculture,
          R/o. Bhatodi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

 7.       Saheb s/o. Raghu Labade,
          Age. 60 years, Occ. Agriculture,
          R/o. Bhatodi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

 8.       Ashok S/o. Machindra Dhalpe,
          Age. 75 years, Occ. Agriculture,
          R/o. Bhatodi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.               ...Respondents.



::: Uploaded on - 05/01/2021                   ::: Downloaded on - 06/02/2021 18:56:54 :::
                                                         953WP7053.20
                                      2

          Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Sk. Mazhar A. Jahagirdar.
          Advocate for Respondent No. 1 : Mr. G.B. Patunkar.

                                          CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL, J.

DATED : 05.01.2021

Judgment :

Heard.

2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent

of both the sides, the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission.

3. The order refusing to grant temporary injunction has been

challenged before the District Court in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.

100 of 2019 under Section 104 of the Code of Civil Procedure. By the

impugned order the learned District Judge directed the parties to

maintain status quo as regards the construction, till further orders.

This order was passed on 25.09.2019, since the Miscellaneous Civil

Appeal is pending before the learned District Judge, it would be

appropriate to allow the status quo as directed to continue for some

limited time and requesting the learned District Judge to decide the

Civil Application finally.

4. Writ Petition is partly allowed, the learned District Judge shall

953WP7053.20

make every endeavor to decide the Miscellaneous Civil Appeal as

early as possible and in any event within the period of six weeks from

today. Till then, the order of status quo to continue.

( MANGESH S. PATIL, J. )

S.P.C.