Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10284 (BOM)

SHRI. KRISHNA NANA KAPARE v. SHRI. DATTATRAYA BABURAO OHAL AND ORS.

WP/12615/2016 · 2026-09-22

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Renuka Thakur 907-WP-12615-2016.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 12615 OF 2016 Shri. Krishna Nana Kapare ...Petitioner V/s. Shri. Dattatraya Baburao Ohal and Ors. ...Respondents ________________ Mr. Anuj Tiwari i/b Mr. Vivek V. Salunke for Petitioner. Adv. Priyal G. Sarda with Ms. Seema Dighe for Respondent No. 1. ________________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 22 SEPTEMBER 2026. P.C.: 1) The Petitioner challenges concurrent findings recorded against the Petitioner by the Co-operative Court and by the Co-operative Appellate Court in relation to the relief of injunction sought by him against the Respondents. The Petitioner is an allottee in respect of plot No. C-8 whereas Respondent No. 1 is an allottee of plot No. C-7. It is Petitioner's grievance that he had received possession of only land admeasuring 1000 Sq. Ft when in fact his entitlement is to land admeasuring 1200 Sq. Ft. However, though he prayed for relief against the society (Opponent No. 3) for handing over balance land admeasuring 200 Sq. Ft., the Petitioner gave up his challenge before the Co-operative Court. Thus, the dispute remained pending only in respect of prayer for injunction against the Respondents to prohibit them from disturbing Page No. 1 of 2 22 SEPTEMBER 2026 Renuka Thakur 907-WP-12615-2016.docx possession of the Petitioner over sub plot No. C-8. Upon inquiry, both Co-operative Court as well as Co-operative Appellate Court have arrived at a conclusion that Petitioner has encroached upon common space towards the southern side by extinguishing the gap between two sets of plots (Plot No. 7, 8 and Plot Nos. 9, 10). Since Petitioner himself appears to be an encroacher over common space, the question of granting injunction in his favour does not arise. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order. 2) Writ Petition is accordingly rejected. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 2 of 2 22 SEPTEMBER 2026 Signed by: Renuka S Thakur Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 23/09/2026 11:51:37