IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.11614 OF 2026 Modern India Limited .... Petitioner through Sidhhant Jatia, Ex.Director Vs. Jitendra Ramnath Bhosle & Ors. .... Respondents Mr. Jamshed Master a/w Sanidha Vedpathak, Abbas Tinwalla i/by Maneksha & Sethna for Petitioner. Mr. Vivek R. Walavalkar i/by Mr. Sameer R. Bhalekar for Respondent no.1. Mr. Ranjeev Carvalho a/w Aman Saraf, Rishab Murali, Sakshi Agarwal i/by Bipin Joshi for Respondent no.2. Mr. Sanjiv Sawant a/w Bhakti Wast i/b Heramb Kadam for Respondent no.3. Mr. Sachin Shetye for Respondent nos. 4 and 6. CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 2nd September 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner presses the application seeking an injunction against Respondent Nos.2 to 6. However, the Order dated 17th July 2026 indicates that the Appellant had sought an ad-interim ex parte injunction only against Respondent No.1. The said Order does not indicate that the Applicant had prayed for an injunction against Respondent Nos. 2 to 6. 1/2 905 WP 11614.26.doc Dusane BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Digitally signed by BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Date: 2026.09.05 12:58:32 +0530 3. Counsel for the Petitioner argued that the application was a composite application against Respondent Nos. 1 to 6. However, the order records that the Applicant sought an injunction only against Respondent No. 1. Therefore, the order does not address or decide the prayer for injunction against Respondent Nos. 2 to 6. 4. The Applicant is at liberty to approach this Hon’ble Court for appropriate injunctive relief against Respondent Nos. 2 to 6. 5. If such an application is filed, or if the instant application is taken up for reconsideration qua Respondent Nos. 2 to 6, the Court shall decide the same in accordance with law. 6. The Writ Petition is disposed of. [ ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ] 2/2 905 WP 11614.26.doc Dusane