Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14906 (BOM)

DASHRATH BHAGWANTRAO JADHAV AND OTHERS v. VYANKAT BHAGWANTRAO JADHAV

WP/8507/2025 · 2025-10-13

Shri Arun R Pedneker

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 6 WRIT PETITION NO. 8507 OF 2025 DASHRATH BHAGWANTRAO JADHAV AND OTHERS VERSUS VYANKAT BHAGWANTRAO JADHAV ... Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Kodale Vikas G. ... WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8856 OF 2025 IN WP/8507/2025 ... CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 13.10.2025 PER COURT: 1. Heard. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the suit for simplicitor injuction was filed in which Exhibit-5 application filed for temporary injunction. The same was not pressed. Thereafter, an application was filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC seeking declaratory relief and also for measurement of property. He submits that such an application ought not to have been allowed. 3. It is well settled position of law in the case of Life Insurance Corporation of Indian Vs. Sanjeev Builders Private 2025:BHC-AUG:29091 2 6 Limited and others, (2022) 16 SCC 1, that the amendment application before commencing the trial are to be liberally allowed. The amendment application seeks declaratory reliefs. The amendment cannot be said to be in any way prejudice to the petitioners. 4. Considering the same, no case is made out. The Writ Petition stands dismissed. 5. In view of dismissal of the writ petition, pending applications, if any, shall also stands disposed of. [ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.] marathe