Krushnaji Pingle & Ors. v. Kantilal Premji Patel
Case at a glance
- Bench
- CHAVAN
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
Judgment
Mr.Sarang Arandhye h/f.Mr.S.D.Modak respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : : : R.C. R.C. R.C. CHAVAN, CHAVAN, CHAVAN, J. J J DATEDATEDATE ::: 13TH APRIL, 2007. 13TH APRIL, 2007. 13TH APRIL, 2007. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29th October, 2004 passed learned 7th Adhoc District Judge, Pune disposing Miscellaneous Addl. Civil Appeal No.606 2002 whereby learned Judge vacated injunction granted in favour of the petitioner by the learned IInd Addl. Judge, Small Causes Court, Pune.
As for the first apprehension about carrying out repairs affect structure permanently, : 2 : photograph learned counsel exhibit repairs already carried whatever damage petitioner apprehends already done. Therefore, respondent question restraining injunction carrying further repairs. The second apprehension petitioner relates creation interest. While Judge granted injunction restraining respondent creating interest, learned Judge First Appellate Court vacated injunction judgement 29th October,
2004. Now, April,
2007. If interest created far, apprehension petitioner unfounded. In case, prohibits creation interest, a ground tenant’s ejectment, further addition judicial dictum reiterating tenant should not create third party interest would be meaningless.
In view of this, the impugned order does not call interference exercise jurisdiction Article 227 Constitution India. The Petition consequently dismissed. The contentions raised petition agitated before Trial Judge before pending. The learned Trial Judge : 3 : consideration pending since year 2002 and endeavour to dispose of the same as early as possible. CHAVAN, J.) (R.C. CHAVAN, J.) (R.C. CHAVAN, J.) (R.C. Dt.13th April, 2007 . Respectfully submitted to the Hon’ble Mr.Justice R.C.Chavan. . The list of following proceedings disposed of on today by your Lordship is as under : - : 4 : ------------------------ Proceeding No. Sr. No. ------------------------
1. WP 1477 of 2006
2. WP 2305 of 2004
3. WP 10076 of 2004
4. WP 2433 of 2006
WP 2653 of 2006
WP 7879 of 2006
WP 3930 of 2004 ------------------------ Yours faithfully, H. G. SUTAR P.A. to Hon’ble Judge
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.