Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Bombay High Court

M/S. Thyrocare Hospitals Ltd. vs Shri. Ashok Krishnaji Bhujbal And Ors. on 23 September, 2025

2025:BHC-AS:40252

              Megha                                        43_wp_2219_2015.docx


                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                WRIT PETITION NO.2219 OF 2015

              M/s. Thyrocare Hospitals Ltd                               ...Petitioner

                                 V/s.

              Ashok Krishnaji Bhujbal and Ors.                   ...Respondent
                                         ______________
              Mr. G.S. Hegde, Senior Advocate with Mr. T.J. Pandian for the Petitioner.

              Ms. Apurva Gudewar i/b. Mr. D.D. Dhanure for Respondent No.7.
                                       ______________

                                             CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

DATED: 23 SEPTEMBER 2025.

P.C.:

1) The Petition challenges order dated 10 November 2014 passed by the Principal District Judge, Raigad, Alibag, dismissing the Civil Misc. Appeal No.36 of 2012 filed by the Petitioner and confirming the order dated 17 March 2012 passed by the II nd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Panvel, by which Petitioner's application below Exhibit-5 in Regular Civil Suit No.26 of 2012 for temporary injunction came to be rejected.

2) I have heard Mr. Hegde, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Pandian, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.7.

23 September 2025 Megha 43_wp_2219_2015.docx

3) The Suit is pending since the year 2012. During last 13 long years there is no interim protection granted in favour of the Petitioner- Plaintiff. Decision of the Suit is apparently held up on account of pendency of the present Petition. No injunctive relief is granted in favour of the Petitioner in the present Petition, which is pending for the last 10 long years. In my view therefore, instead of determining Plaintiff 's entitlement for temporary injunction at this distant date, it would be appropriate that the Suit is taken for decision in an expeditious manner.

4) Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of requesting the Trial Court to decide Regular Civil Suit No.26 of 2012 in an expeditious manner, preferably within a period of one year. Trial Court shall decide the Suit on its own merits without being influenced by any of the findings recorded in the present order.

5) All contentions of the parties on merits are expressly kept open.

[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Signed by: Megha S. Parab Page No. 2 of 2 Designation: PA To Honourable Judge 23 September 2025 Date: 24/09/2025 17:47:13