Bharatkumar Shankarlal Somani v. Kantilal Chandmal Shah
2017-09-18
AKIL KURESHI, BIREN VAISHNAV
body2017
DigiLaw.ai
ORDER : AKIL KURESHI, J. 1. RULE. Mr. Majmudar waived rule for respondent no. 1 and Ms. Acharya waived rule for respondent no. 2. 2. By an order dated 10.07.2017 in Civil Application No. 5507 of 2017, following directions were issued. “8. With respect to Civil Application No. 5507 of 2007, we modify interim order of this Court dated 04.05.2017 by permitting the Trial Court to consider the interim injunction application of defendant No. 2 and decide the same in accordance with law after hearing all sides. However, the Trial Court shall not proceed further beyond in the said counter claim petition itself. In other words, the Trial Court would be at liberty to, and expected to decide the interim injunction application and all issues arising therein in the said counter claim petition but not to decide and dispose of the claim petition itself finally. This consideration shall be without being influenced by the proceedings pending before the Court. 9. The last direction would, however, require some clarification and elaboration. According to the defendants, the plaintiff has, under leave and license agreement dated 10.04.2013, put his son in possession of the said property and it is being used for commercial purposes. According to the defendants, the plaintiff being a co-owner, could not have granted such leave and license nor could have, without the consent of other co. owners, put his son in possession of the property. These suggestions of course the plaintiff strongly refutes. These issues may crop up before the Trial Court in pending injunction application filed by defendant No. 2. Nothing stated in this order, including the requirement of the parties to maintain status quo, would prevent the Trial Court from deciding such issues in accordance with law.” 3. The applicant-original respondent no. 2 of the First Appeal, through this Civil Application points out that since the original proceedings of Special Civil Suit No. 53 of 2016 sent by the trial Court is lying with the registry of this Court, it is not possible by the trial Court to carry out directions dated 10.07.2017 noted above. 4. Under the circumstances, the registry shall transmit the original proceedings of Special Civil Suit No. 53 of 2016 to the trial Court. The trial Court is requested to send the same back to the High Court after taking steps as per the said order dated 10.07.2017 5.
4. Under the circumstances, the registry shall transmit the original proceedings of Special Civil Suit No. 53 of 2016 to the trial Court. The trial Court is requested to send the same back to the High Court after taking steps as per the said order dated 10.07.2017 5. Civil Application is disposed of accordingly.