Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1048 (BOM)

Mazania Of Temple Of Navadurga Of Madkai v. Devi Navadurga Pratishthan

2020-09-25

M.S.SONAK

body2020
JUDGMENT M. S. Sonak, J. - Heard Mr. Preetam Talaulikar, learned Counsel for the appellants. Mr. J. P. Supekar, appears for the respondents No. 1 to 23. 2. Mr. Talaulikar points out that there is yet another appeal from order No.28 of 2017, in which, as well the challenge is to the impugned order in this appeal. He submits that since the appellants in the present matter are also appellants to the said appeal, the appeal from order may also be taken up alongwith this appeal from order. Accordingly, appeal from order No.28 of 2017, which is not on board, is taken up on board in view of the request of the learned Counsel for the appellants, Mr. Talaulikar. 3. The challenge in this appeal is to the impugned order dated 20.04.2016 by which the appellants, were restrained from dismantling, changing, substituting the idol of Devi Navadurga from the temple of Shree Navadurga of Madkai. 4. From the date of the order, there is no interim relief in favour of the appellants herein. Besides, Mr. Talaulikar points out that by now the time for dismantling, changing or substituting the idol of the deity has also gone by. Mr. Supekar points out that even the suit is at an advance stage. 5. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, there is really no case made out at this stage to grant any relief in these appeals from order. Except, it is necessary to point out that the suit will have to be disposed of on its own merits and in accordance with law without being influenced by any observations in the impugned order. 6. Therefore, clarifying as aforesaid, both these appeals are disposed off. 7. Mr. Talaulikar points out that there are some settlement talks in progress between the parties. If that be so, such settlement talks can as well proceed during the pendency of the suit. In fact, in these kind of matters, a settlement is a much better alternative than litigation. 8. The two appeals are accordingly disposed off in the aforesaid terms. 9. There shall be no order as to costs. 10. All concerned to act on the basis of the authenticated copy of this Order.