SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Bom) 802

A.M.KHANWILKAR
Arjun Dada Gadage – Appellant
Versus
Mallappa Gurappa Chougule & another – Respondent


JUDGMENT - KHANWILKAR A.M., J.:---Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent.

3. As short question is involved, the matter is taken for final hearing forthwith, by consent.

4. Respondent No. 1 has died long back during the pendency of the proceedings before the lower Court. In this view of the matter, Counsel for the petitioner orally prays for permission to delete respondent No. 1. As per oral request, petitioner is allowed to delete respondent No. 1 at his risk. Amendment be carried out forthwith.

5. This petition takes exception to the judgment and order passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kurundwad dated October 8, 2001 below Exhibit 45 in R.C.S. No. 66 of 1985. The respondent along with the deleted respondent No. 1 has filed suit for permanent injunction and declaration before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, being Regular Suit No. 66 of 1985. In the said suit, application for interim relief (Exhibit 5) was filed, which was, however, rejected. The matter was carried in appeal by the respondents, which appeal was also dismissed by the District Court on July 8, 1986. While considering that appeal, the District Court has dealt with the contention raised on be










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top