Mira W/O. Ramesh Kulkarni & Ors vs Ashok Uttamrao Kulkarni & Ors

Ajit B. Kadethankar, J

Not on Board. On the request of Mr. Murkute learned Advocate for petitioner, taken on Board in the light of the pressing urgency mentioned by him.

Mr. Murkute submits that a disagreement amongst the family members over their respective rights on immovable properties resulted into the Regular Civil Suit No. 129 of 2023 filed by present petitioners for Mandatory Injunction in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Gangakhed.

According to the Petitioners, claim of the petitioner was based on the compromise that has already been arrived in between the parties. That, despite there was settlement of the civil rights of the parties, the petitioners were aggrieved by the evil activities of the respondents whereby they had started to interfere into Petitioners' peaceful possession over the suit properties.

That, during pendency of the suit the defendants appeared and lodged their counter claim. Both the parties filed their respective applications for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code. Vide order dated 03.01.2026 passed on an application (Exh.81), learned Judge of the Civil Court pleased to direct both the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the suit property. It is further submitted that the said status quo order was in force till disposal of the temporary injunction applications of both the sides.

That, it is a matter of fact that the applications filed by both the parties seeking temporary injunctions against each other came to be dismissed. The petitioners preferred Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 5 of 2026 in the Court of learned Additional District Judge at Gangakhed. During pendency of the appeal, the petitioner filed an application seeking status quo in respect of the suit properties.

Mr. Murkute submits that the said application for interim status quo was not granted by the learned Appellate Court on the ground that as per Trial Court's observation, both the parties have failed to establish their respective prima facie case. Thus, the petitioners are before this Court vide this writ petition.

Learned advocate for the Petitioner urges that the writ petition is filed for extremely limited purpose only to seek status quo as regards to the suit properties till pendency of the Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 5 of 2026 (supra).

Needless to record, it's a civil dispute amongst the family members and also involves some other persons who have come into picture on account of third party interest created by the defendants. The record placed before me show that the Trial Court has initially granted status quo and later the applications filed by both the parties for temporary injunction came to be rejected. Miscellaneous Civil Appeal filed by the petitioner is pending before the learned Additional District Judge. A crime No. 0005 of 2026 dated 04.01.2026 is also registered at Police Station, Sonpeth by the present petitioner against some of the defendants taking to the possession and disturbance to the possession in the suit property.

Issue notice to respondents returnable on 02.07.2026. The Petitioner is at liberty to serve the respondents by any permissible mode of private service.

In the interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to direct the parties to maintain status quo till the returnable date i.e. till 02-07-2026. Accordingly, parties to the Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 05 of 2026 pending before the Learned Additional District Judge, Gangakhed shall observe 'Status Quo' as regards to the suit property.

It is clarified that pendency of the present writ petition is not an impediment for the learned Additional District Judge, Gangakhed and the Learned Trial Court to hear and decide the respective proceedings pending before them between the parties on its own merit. Both the proceedings must proceed further irrespective of pendency of this Writ Petition.