Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Mehul Mahendra Thakkar @ Karia vs Meena Mehul Thakkar @ Karia

Supreme Court23 March 2009H.L. Dattu · Tarun Chatterjee

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

An interim order passed during the pendency of an appeal ought not to grant the final relief sought in the main petition; such an order is unsustainable as a matter of settled legal principle, and the High Court erred in directing the Court Receiver to take possession of the disputed property and induct the respondent during the appeal rather than preserving the status quo pending the decision on the merits.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1788 OF 2009(Arising out of SLP(C) No. 22196 of 2007)

Mehul Mahendra Thakkar @ Karia ..........Appellant

Versus

Meena Mehul Thakkar @ Karia ........Respondent

ORDER

Leave granted.

2) The order passed by the High Court of Bombay in Civil

Application No. 238 of 2007 filed in Family Court Appeal No.

128 of 2007 dated 5.10.2007 is the subject matter of this appeal.

3) By the impugned order, the court has directed the Court Receiver

to take possession of the flat from the appellant and induct

respondent-wife in the flat during the pendency of the appeal.

4) In the appeal filed, the appellant has called in question the

correctness or otherwise of the findings and the conclusion

reached by the Family Court in Petition No. A-1072/2000 dated

1 6.2.2007, wherein the Family Court has reached the conclusion

that both the husband and wife are joint owners of flat bearing No.

303, Rajesh Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Borivali

(West), Mumbai.

5) Even before giving a verdict on the findings and the conclusions

reached by the Family Court, by way of interim relief, the court

has granted the main relief itself. This, in our opinion is

unsustainable. It is settled legal position, that by way of interim

relief, final relief should not be granted till the matter is decided

one way or the other.

6) In view of the above, we allow this appeal and set aside the order

by the High Court in Family Court Appeal No. 128 of 2007 dated

5th day of October, 2007. In view of the peculiar facts and

circumstances of this case, we request the court to dispose of the

appeal as early as possible and at any rate within an outer limit of

six months from the date of receipt of copy of this court's order.

.......................................J. [ TARUN CHATTERJEE ]

.......................................J. [ H.L. DATTU ]

2 New Delhi, March 23, 2009.

3

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free