[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Vasant Tukaram Kalate vs Envirant Developers Private Limited ... on 26 March, 2026
Author: Milind N. Jadhav
Bench: Milind N. Jadhav
2026:BHC-AS:14630
P12.AOST.8729.2026.doc
Ajay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO. 8729 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO.8730 OF 2026
IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO. 8729 OF 2026
Vasant Tukaram Kalate Appellant (Orig.
.. Plaintiff No.1)
Versus
Envirant Developers Private Limited and Ors. .. Respondents
....................
Mr. Pradeep Thorat a/w. Mr. Sandeep S. Salunkhe, Advocates for
Appellant.
....................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : MARCH 26, 2026.
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Thorat, learned Advocate for Appellant.
2. The present Appeal from Order is mentioned at the time of
rising today citing grave exigency and intervention of the Court is
sought for. It is argued that the learned Trial Court has passed order
on 21.10.2022 after perusing the Application filed by Plaintiff and
directing Defendants to maintain status quo till the next adjourned
date. Plaintiff thereafter filed further Application below Exhibit-145
seeking extension of the said status quo order which was allowed by a
reasoned order dated 21.06.2025.
1 of 4
P12.AOST.8729.2026.doc
3. Mr. Thorat would submit that thereafter the matter was
transferred to another Court and on the first date of transfer i.e.
24.03.2026 the impugned order below Exhibit-151 was passed by the
Court rejecting Application for extension of status quo. The reason
mentioned in the order is that it is wrong practice that parties are
taking status quo orders and continuing it for years and not
prosecuting the same or proceeding with the hearing in Exhibit-5. The
Court has opined that such practice needs to be stopped but apparent
ground as stated in the impugned order is that there is no reasonable
ground for extension of status quo order and Plaintiff has failed to file
application for adjournment of argument on Exhibit-5.
4. Reference is also made to the fact that proceeding in respect
of suit property is sub-judicied before the National Company Law
Tribunal, Mumbai. There is a direction which also states that parties
have filed written arguments on Application below Exhibit-5, but they
are not proceeding with the argument.
5. Considering the fact that ad-interim order was in place since
21.10.2022, it would be appropriate if the parties appear before the
learned Trial Court and argue and make their submissions on Exhibit-5
in respect of which written arguments have already been filed by the
parties below Exhibits-68 and 80 as stated by the learned Trial Court.
2 of 4
P12.AOST.8729.2026.doc
6. In that view of the matter, no purpose whatsoever will be
served by keeping the present Appeal from Order pending in this Court
and issuing notice to the parties since this Court would like to refrain
from deciding the disputed questions of facts when Exhibit-5 can be
decided by Trial Court. It would be infact the prerogative of the
learned Trial Court to decide the Application below Exhibit-5 strictly in
accordance with law.
7. Hence, it is directed that the status quo order dated
21.10.2022 which was continued by the learned Trial Court stands
extended for a period of four weeks from today with a direction that
Application below Exhibit-5 in Special Civil Suit No.2206 of 2022 shall
be heard by the learned Trial Court on any date as per convenience of
Court and reasoned speaking order may be passed in accordance with
law. Copy of this order shall be placed before the Trial Court
tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. by the Appellant.
8. If parties do not remain present or derelict from remaining
present and do not proceed with the arguments, liberty is given to
learned Trial Court to consider the written arguments below Exhibits-
60 and 80 which are already on record and determine the Application
below Exhibit-5 in accordance with law.
9. Needless to state that this Court has not given any
imprimatur on merits of the matter in respect of the case of either of
3 of 4
P12.AOST.8729.2026.doc
the parties and leave it entirely to the discretion of the learned Trial
Court to determine the Application below Exhibit-5 strictly in
accordance with law.
10. All parties to act on server copy of this order.
11. With the above direction, Appeal from Order. In view of
disposal of Appeal from Order, pending Interim Application is also
disposed.
[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Ajay
Digitally
signed by AJAY
TRAMBAK
AJAY UGALMUGALE
TRAMBAK
UGALMUGALE Date:
2026.03.26
19:28:02
+0530
4 of 4
