Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9112 (BOM)

UNION OF INDIA THR THR DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER v. Yogesh Behram Anklesaria

WP/12162/2026 · 2026-09-18

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

11 WP-12162-26.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 12162 OF 2026 Union of India ..Petitioner Versus Yogesh Behram Anklesaria & anr. …Respondents Dr. G R Sharma, a/w Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Mr. Sandeep Raman, Mr. Rushikesh Bhadre, for the Petitioner/UOI. Mr. K J Presswalla, a/w Mr. Tushad Kakalia, Mr. Sandeep Goyal, i/b Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe, for the Respondent No.2. CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 18th SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The challenge in this petition is to the order passed by the Civil Court, Pune on an application for interim injunction restraining the petitioner from acting upon the notice dated 23rd December, 2025, purportedly issued under the provisions of the Cantonments Act, 2006 in Regular Civil Suit No. 1424/2019 instituted by the respondents. 3. The petitioner has an efficacious statutory remedy of filing an appeal against the impugned order granting injunction, SAINATH, PA 1/2 SAINATH SANJAY BODKHE Digitally signed by SAINATH SANJAY BODKHE Date: 2026.09.19 16:34:52 +0530 11 WP-12162-26.DOC under the provisions of Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. There is no justifiable reason to entertain the petition despite the availability of the statutory remedy of appeal. 4. Thus, the Writ Petition stands disposed with liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned order. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] SAINATH, PA 2/2