ANURADHA KAKASAHEB TUPE AND OTHERS v. JANARDHAN RANGNATH TUPE AND OTHERS
WP/3580/2024 · 2026-08-31
Civil Appealbody2024
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2024 DAILYLAW 2376 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2024 DAILYLAW 2376 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 38-wp-3580-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3580 OF 2024 Anuradha Kakasaheb Tupe And Others VERSUS Janardhan Rangnath Tupe And Others ... Mr. P. N. Sonpethkar, Advocate for the Petitioners …..
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATED : 31ST AUGUST, 2026 P.C. :- . Considering the short issue in the matter and the relief sought in the petition, the petition is disposed of at admission stage.
2. Regular Civil Suit No.164 of 2021 is filed by the petitioners against the respondents in the Court of learned Civil Judge Junior Division, Vaijapur. In the suit, an application below Exhibit 5 under Order XXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code came to be filed by the petitioners against the respondents. After hearing both the parties, vide the order dated 10.07.2023, the Trial Court pleased to reject the said application. 2026:BHC-AUG:40062
2 38-wp-3580-2024
3. Feeling dissatisfied thereby, the petitioners approached District Court vide Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.32 of 2023. After hearing both the sides, the said appeal came to be turned down vide order dated 05.02.2024. As against that
order, the plaintiffs/petitioners are before this Court.
4. The petitioners were not granted the relief of temporary injunction by the Trial Court as also by the District Court. Since the Writ Petition was filed in the year 2024, the purpose of granting temporary injunction under Order XXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code is very specific and to provide immediate and limited protection to a party who establishes prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss.
5. Both the Courts have decided the case of the petitioners on the aforesaid three parameters, and upon such
consideration, the application as well as the appeal came to be dismissed. Obviously, the pendency of the Writ Petition itself show that, at this juncture no such relief can be granted. It does not mean that the petitioners can not establish their case on merits before the Trial Court. In view of this, I pass following order:
3 38-wp-3580-2024
ORDER a. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. b. The Trial Court is requested to conclude the suit proceedings within a period of one year. c. It is clarified that the observations rendered by the Trial Court and the District Court were to the extent of grant of temporary injunction and only on the basis of the record that was placed before them for such relief.
( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. ) Rushikesh/2026