SRJ wp-4255-09.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4255 OF 2009 Ambavi B. Patel ..Petitioner. Vs. The Managing Director- City & Industrial Development Corpn., of Maharashtra Ltd., & Anr., ..Respondents. Mr.Subhash Zha, i/b.M/s. Law Global, for Petitioner. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 8th October, 2009. P.C. : 1] Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner. The Petitioner is the original Plaintiff. In a suit filed by the Petitioner/Plaintiff, the Trial Court declined to grant order of interim injunction. The said order has been confirmed in the Appeal. It is not in dispute that the Petitioner claims rights on the basis of an agreement executed by the First Respondent. In fact, his entry in the suit premises is on the basis of the agreement and the rights created by the said Agreement executed by the First Respondent. The Petitioner wants to challenge some of clauses in the same agreement on the ground that the SRJ wp-4255-09.sxw 2 same are contrary to provision of the section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The allegation against the Petitioner is that he is using suit premises for a purpose which is not in accordance with the Agreement. 2] A temporary injunction is always a discretionary and equitable relief. After having acted upon the said agreement, the Petitioner now wants to contend that one of the clauses in the agreement is illegal. Therefore, the Courts below were justified in denying equitable relief of temporary injunction. Hence,the Petition is rejected. 3] The observations made in the impugned orders are only for a limited purpose of considering the prayer for interim relief. The suit will be decided on its merits without being influenced by said observations. Hearing of the suit is expedited. (A.S.OKA, J. )