Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Naresh Chunilal Jain Alias Parmar And ... vs Shantilal K. Shah And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 3733 Bom

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 3733 Bom
Judgement Date : 15 April, 2026

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Naresh Chunilal Jain Alias Parmar And ... vs Shantilal K. Shah And Others on 15 April, 2026

Author: Milind N. Jadhav
Bench: Milind N. Jadhav
                                                                   11-12-13 IA-2466-2467-2468-26.odt


Amberkar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                             CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                           INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2466 OF 2026
                                          WITH
                         APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO. 1910 OF 2026

           Naresh Chunilal Jain alias Parmar & Anr.                               Applicants /
                                                                                  Appellants
                                                                               .. (Org. Defendant Nos. 4 & 5)
                       Versus
           Shantilal K. Shah & Ors.                                               Respondents
                                                                                  (R1-Org. Plaintiff
                                                                                  R 2 to 6 - Org. Defendant
                                                                               .. Nos. 1 to 3 & 6 to 7)

                                          WITH
                           INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2467 OF 2026
                                          WITH
                         APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO. 1913 OF 2026

           Naresh Chunilal Jain alias Parmar & Anr.                               Applicants /
                                                                                  Appellants
                                                                               .. (Org. Defendant Nos. 4 & 5)
                     Versus
           Hiren Shantilal Shah & Ors.                                            Respondents
                                                                                  (R1-Org. Plaintiff
                                                                                  R 2 to 6 - Org. Defendant
                                                                               .. Nos. 1 to 3 & 6 to 7)

                                          WITH
                           INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2468 OF 2026
                                          WITH
                         APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO. 1911 OF 2026

           Naresh Chunilal Jain alias Parmar & Anr.                               Applicants /
                                                                                  Appellants
                                                                               .. (Org. Defendant Nos. 4 & 5)
                      Versus
           Jayaben S. Shah & Ors.                                                 Respondents
                                                                                  (R1-Org. Plaintiff
                                                                                  R 2 to 6 - Org. Defendant
                                                                               .. Nos. 1 to 3 & 6 to 7)




                                                                                                          1 of 5



              ::: Uploaded on - 15/04/2026                                  ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2026 20:36:13 :::
                                                                11-12-13 IA-2466-2467-2468-26.odt


                         ....................
 Ms. Pushpa Ganediwala a/w Mr. Ankit B. Rathod, Mr. Ishan
  Agrawal, Anshu Agrawal & Mr. Pradyumna Agrawal, Advocates for
  Appellants
 Mr. Sachin Vajale, Advocate for Respondent No. 5 - Corporation
 Mr. Hiten S. Shah, Respondent No. 1 in AO(St) 1913/2026 present
                                         ...................
                                     CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                     DATE             : APRIL 15, 2026
P. C.:

1. Heard Ms. Ganediwala, learned Advocate for Appellants, Mr.

Hiten Shah, Respondent No. 1 in AO(St) 1913/2026 and Mr. Vajale,

learned Advocate for Respondent No. 5 - Corporation.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in

terms of their status before the Trial Court.

3. At the outset, Ms. Ganediwala would inform the Court that

there is delay of 37 days in filing the present Appeals from Order.

Hence above three captioned Interim Applications have been taken out

for condonation of delay. For the reasons stated therein, Interim

Applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Delay of 37

days in filing the present Appeals stand condoned. Appeals are taken

up for admission and hearing forthwith.

4. Appellants are original Defendant Nos. 4 & 5 before the Trial

Court. Plaintiff before the Trial Court has filed the 3 Suit proceedings

seeking appointment of Receiver, possession as also detention of

2 of 5

11-12-13 IA-2466-2467-2468-26.odt

Defendant Nos. 1 to 5 in Civil Prison for disobeying the Court's order

as also for injunctive reliefs. Plaintiff has also filed Application seeking

relief against the Planning Authority from granting any further

sanction, permission and occupation certificate in respect of the

redeveloped property which is half completed. There are various

charges levelled by Plaintiff against Defendants of sale of suit flats to

several parties. The issue which is emanating from the impugned order

dated 14.11.2025 (3 identical orders in 3 Suit proceedings) is with

regard to directions given to Defendants by learned Trial Court, inter

alia, to pay the temporary accommodation charges to the Plaintiff.

5. Grievance of Defendant Nos. 4 and 5 is pleaded on the basis

that they had retired from Partnership firm as far back as in 2012 and

therefore they would not be liable to pay temporary alternate

accommodation charges to the Plaintiff. However, record shows that

agreement to provide permanent alternate accommodation was

executed between the parties on 06.02.2012.

6. Insofar as the Plaintiff in all three Suit proceedings is concerned,

they are represented by Mr. Hiten Shantilal Shah (Respondent No. 1

in AO 1913/2026) who is the son of Shantilal K. Shah (Respondent

No. 1 in AO (St) No. 1910/2026). He is appearing in person. His

parents are very old. He would submit that he has not appointed any

Advocate as yet. Though he has made certain submissions against his

3 of 5

11-12-13 IA-2466-2467-2468-26.odt

earlier Advocate, I have still persuaded him to take instructions and

appoint an Advocate so that the proceedings can be conducted

properly and appropriately before this Court.

7. Ms. Ganediwala, learned Advocate for Appellants would submit

that directions to pay 50% temporary accommodation charges to the

Plaintiff is the subject matter of challenge in view of the fact that said

Defendants had resigned and retired from Partnership firm in respect

of which liability was thereafter taken over by other partners of firm.

8. Contrary to the submissions made by Defendant Nos. 4 and 5,

Defendant No. 3's case as noted in the impugned order is to the effect

that he has also retired from the Partnership firm and as per the Deed

of Retirement dated 14.02.2019, his liability was taken over by other

partners of Firm at the then time and he has also been discharged by

this Court by order dated 27.04.2022. Defendant No. 3 is not present

before me.

9. In view of the aforesaid rival submissions, issue notice to the

unrepresented Respondents made returnable on 18.06.2026.

Respondents present waive service. Humdast permitted. In addition

to Court's notice, Appellants are directed to serve copy of the AOs

along with copy of this order on the Respondents and inform them

about the next date of hearing by any permissible mode of service and

4 of 5

11-12-13 IA-2466-2467-2468-26.odt

file appropriate affidavit of service with tangible proof thereof on or

before the next date.

10. Plaintiffs are directed to appoint an Advocate to represent and

espouse their cause.

11. After receiving the notice, Respondents to file affidavit-in-reply

within a period of four weeks from today with an advance copy to the

Advocate for Appellants. Rejoinder if any shall be filed within two

weeks thereafter.

12. In the meanwhile, the directions contained in operative clauses

3 and 4 of order dated 14.11.2025 in all three proceedings shall stand

stayed until the present Appeal from Orders are heard for admission

by this Court.

13. Stand over to 18th June, 2026.

Amberkar                                              [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]



           RAVINDRA MOHAN
           MOHAN    AMBERKAR
           AMBERKAR Date:
                     2026.04.15
                     18:13:27 +0530




                                                                                        5 of 5




 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter