1 AO No.526/10 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.526 of 2010 Deepak Dattataya Arey ... Appellant versus Prabhakar Laxman Kamble & ors. ... Respondents ... Mr. Nagendra Shukla i/b B.P. Shukla for the appellant Mr.Sanjeev R. Singh for respondent nos.1 to 3. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 7th December 2010 P.C. 1. Admit. Mr.Singh appears for the respondents and waives service. By consent, taken up for hearing forthwith. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 13 May 2009 passed by the City Civil Judge, Borivali Division, Dindoshi Court, (Hon’ble Shri D.R.Mahajan) dismissing the appellant’s motion for injunction. Perusal of the order shows that the learned Judge has not framed the points for determination. He has not framed a point whether the appellant had made out a prima facie case. He has also not framed a point whether the appellant was in possession of the suit premises on the date of the suit. He has also not considered balance of 2 AO No.526/10 convenience. These points are vital for determination of the matters in controversy and deciding the motion for an interim injunction. In the absence of the framing of necessary points for determination and recording of finding of fact on these points, it was improper on the part of the trial Court to dismiss the motion by generally discussing and writing the order. In the circumstances, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial Court for deciding it afresh in accordance with law. 3. I am informed at the bar that the trial Judge has since been transferred. A copy of this order be sent to him wherever he is posted. (D.G.KARNIK, J)