ANWAR LIYAKAT KHAN AND ANR vs RAMESH DATTATRAYA DHONE AND ORS

Judgment text excerpt

-WP9309-2024.DOC Santosh IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9309 OF 2024 1. Anwar Liyakat Khan 2. Arvindkumar C. Rao ...Petitioners SANTOSH Versus SUBHASH KULKARNI 1. Ramesh Dattatraya Dhone Digitally signed by SANTOSH SUBHASH 2. Santosh Dattatraya Dhone KULKARNI Date: 2025.06.09 3. Manish Babasaheb Tupe …Respondents 17:14:33 +0530 Mr. V. A. Thorat, Senior Advocate, i/b Arkesh Ayyagari, for the Petitioners. Mr. Vijay Upadhyay, for the Respondents. CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. RESERVED ON: 6th MARCH, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON: 9th JUNE, 2025 JUDGMENT:- 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, heard finally. 2. The petitioners, who were the parties to RCS/2546/2022, which came to be decreed in accordance with the Consent Terms dated 15th December, 2022, by an order dated 23 rd December, 2022, and the supplementary Consent Terms, which were accepted, by an order dated 4th May, 2023, assail the legality, propriety and correctness of an order dated 6th November, 2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge in an application, being Civil Misc. Application No.1680 of 2023, 1/25 -WP9309-2024.DOC preferred by the respondents – third parties, whereby the learned Civil Judge, by way of interim relief, stayed the effect and operation of the decree dated 23 rd December, 2022 as modified by the order dated 4th May, 2023 and restored the said RCS/2546/2022 to the file of the Court granting liberty to the respondents to take steps for their impleadment under the provisions of Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (“the Code”). 3. The background facts necessary for the determination of this petition can be stated in brief as under: 3.1 Dara K. Irani was the holder of sev