Bombay High Court
MCA/701/2003 of CONFRE DE FABRICA DA CAPELA DE N.SENHORA DE GUADAL Vs MAHAMAY TEMPLE UTSAV and MEDICAL AID TRUST and 2 ORS., on 18 December 2003
COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 701 OF 2003 CONFRE DE FABRICA DA CAPELA DE ....Applicants N.SENHORA DE GUADAL Versus MAHAMAY TEMPLE UTSAV & MEDICAL AID ....Respondents TRUST & 2 ORS., SHRI S. KARPE,SHRI SUDIN M.S. USGAONKAR Coram:- A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. Date:- 18th
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 701 OF 2003CONFRE DE FABRICA DA CAPELA DE N.SENHORA DE GUADAL
....Applicants
Versus
MAHAMAY TEMPLE UTSAV & MEDICAL AID TRUST & 2 ORS.,
....Respondents
SHRI S. KARPE,SHRI SUDIN M.S. USGAONKAR
-Coram:A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.
-Date:18th December, 2003
P.C.:
Heard both sides. It is not in disputethat no interim relief was granted bythe trial Court during the pendency ofthe suit, which order was confirmed inthe appeal right up to this Court.Indeed, the suit has now been finallydisposed of and finding on relevantissue of possession is recorded againstthe applicant. Be that as it may, inview of the affidavit now filed beforeme, in particular paragraphs 15 and 16thereof, I see no reason to grantinjunction as prayed for in this application.
2. Paragraphs 15 and 16 of theaffidavit which are in the nature ofundertaking given to the Court read thus :- "15. It is stated that the respondent no.1 has no plans to do any furthercutting or excavation, hence thequestion of causing any damage or wasteor changing the nature of he suitproperty does nor arise.16. Relating to the relief seekingrestraint or alienation of the suitproperty, the same is not available nowthis Hon'ble Court having once declinedto grant the same by order dated23/03/2001. Also all the plots exceptone have already been sold. The plotholders are free to construct houses onthe plots purchased. So also respondentno.1 is free to sell the last plot andcomplete the work of development as perthe approved plan."The respondents will be bound toobserve that position as stated in theaffidavit till the disposal of theappeal and no activity which wouldbreach the above position be undertaken,save and except with prior permission ofthe Court. Needless to mention that anythird party rights or interest createdby the respondents in the suit propertywill be subject to the outcome of theAppeal.Application disposed of on the aboveterms.