1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4886 of 2008 Shri Sanjay Tukaram Dhumane & ors. .. Petitioners versus Sou Shobha Shivaji Ugale .. Respondent ... Mr.N.V. Bandiwadekar for the petitioners. Mr.V.Z. Kankaria for the respondent. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED : 4th August 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Mr.Kankaria waives notice for the respondent. As short question is involved, petition is taken up for final disposal forthwith by consent. 2 3. This writ petition under Article 227 takes exception to the judgement and order passed by the Adhoc District Judge-I, Nashik dated 3rd May 2008 dismissing the Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.3 of 2007. The said appeal was filed by the petitioner challenging the judgement and order passed by the trial court on application for interim relief during the pendency of the suit. The appellate court has dismissed that appeal by a cryptic order, the relevant part thereof reads thus:- 15. It is pertinent to note that respondent had filed an application for temporary injunction inspite of that while passing the order the trial court did not apply mind and instead of mentioning defendant mentioned the word plaintiff. Infact, it was the application of the defendant/respondent. 16. Trial court has considered the prima facie case, in favour of the respondent. Balance of convenience in favour of the respondent. I cannot differ with the findings of the trial court. I have also gone through the same. 17. Only mistake committees by the trial court is that instead of mentioning defendant in the order below Exh.51, the trial court used the word as plaintiff. There is absolutely no deliberation on the issues raised by the rival parties on factual matters as well as legal questions. The appellate court was 3 obliged to consider all relevant aspects of the matter and analyse the rival contention including the correctness of the finding recorded by the lower court on matters agitated in the appeal by the appellant. That has not been done. Instead, the Appellate Court has summarily dismissed the appeal by a cryptic order. In the circumstances, the only course open to this court is to set aside the impugned judgement and order and relegate the parties before the appellate court for reconsideration of Miscellaneous Civil Appeal no.3 of 2007 on merits in accordance with law. 4. All questions in the restored appeal will have to be addressed afresh uninfluenced by the observations in the impugned order or for that matter the present order. The parties shall appear before the appellate court on 28th August 2008, on which date the appellate court may proceed with the hearing of the appeal or assign suitable date so as to ensure that the appeal is finally disposed of not later than 15th November 2008. Both the counsel assure to extend necessary co-operation in the appellate court for early disposal of the appeal. 5. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. 4 (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)