Renuka 1-WP-5257-2016.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5257 OF 2016 Mrs. Kalpana Pandharinath Patil Through Attorney Mr. Pandharinath Patil And Anr ...Petitioner V/s. Mr. Rama Dinkar Mhatre And Ors ...Respondents ________________ Mr. Shrishailya S. Deshmukh for Petitioner. Mr. Dnyaneshwar J. Deshmukh for Respondent Nos. 1 to 16. Mr. Rameshwar Gite for Respondent Nos. 17 to 20. ________________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 1 SEPTEMBER 2026. P.C.: 1) The Petition challenges order dated 3 February 2016 passed by the Principal District Judge, Thane allowing Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 175 of 2014 and setting aside the order dated 22 August 2014 passed by the Trial Court. By order dated 22 August 2014, the Trial Court had allowed Application at Exh-6 and had granted temporary injunction in favour of the Petitioner/Plaintiff restraining the Defendants from creating any obstruction in respect of the construction activity of the Petitioner in the suit property. The Defendants were also restrained from creating any third party rights in the suit property. The Appellate Court has withdrawn the injunction while setting aside the order passed by the Page No. 1 of 3 1 SEPTEMBER 2026 2026:BHC-AS:35961 Renuka 1-WP-5257-2016.docx Trial Court. On 3 May 2016, this Court has stayed the order of the District Court dated 3 February 2016 subject to the condition of restraining the Plaintiff from creating any third party interests in the suit property. The protection granted in favour of the Petitioner by order dated 3 May 2016 continues to operate for the last 10 long years. In that view of the matter, instead of determining correctness of the order passed by the District Court, it would be appropriate to continue the interim protection made in favour of the Petitioner by this Court, during pendency of the suit. 2) By order dated 3 May 2016, there is an embargo on the Petitioner/Plaintiff from creating third party rights in respect of the entire suit property. Petitioners are developers and are constructing a building on the suit property. Petitioners therefore cannot be restrained from selling the flats in the building constructed on the suit property. It is the case of the Petitioners that they have settled the disputes with all the brothers and now only Respondent Nos. 17 to 20 (sisters) have remained, who are still interested in contesting the suit. In my view, therefore, an arrangement can be made for the purpose of securing the share of Respondent Nos. 17 to 20 to some extent in the newly constructed building. 3) It is submitted on behalf of Respondent Nos. 17 to 20 that they are four sisters against 5 brothers and that therefore sisters would have 40% share in the suit property. Contention is disputed by the Plaintiff, who claim that the brothers have already accepted monies on behalf of sisters as well. This is disputed by the sisters. Considering this position, in my view, it would be appropriate to direct the Petitioners to Page No. 2 of 3 1 SEPTEMBER 2026 Renuka 1-WP-5257-2016.docx reserve builtup area of 3000 Sq. Ft in the new building for securing the interests of Respondent Nos. 17 to 20. 4) Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:- (i) Order passed by the District Court dated 3 February 2016 is set aside. (ii) Temporary injunction granted by the Trial Court by order dated 22 August 2014 shall continue to operate throughout pendency of the suit subject to the condition that Plaintiffs shall secure and keep reserved constructed area of 3000 sq. ft in the building under construction on the suit property. During pendency of the suit, the Petitioners shall not create any rights in respect of such reserved portion of 3000 sq. ft. (iii) Plaintiff shall file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating the details of the area so reserved within 4 weeks. 5) With the above directions, Writ Petition is partly allowed and disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 6) Considering the fact that the suit is pending since the year 2013, the Trial Court shall accord due priority for its expeditious disposal. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 3 of 3 1 SEPTEMBER 2026 Signed by: Renuka S Thakur Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 02/09/2026 13:34:52