High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the rejection of status-quo prayers in a civil suit regarding water fetching and tree cutting. The court found sufficient material to sustain lower courts' findings and noted limited jurisdiction under Article 227 to disturb facts.
Writ petition dismissed; suit hearing expedited.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
WRIT PETITION NO.7683 OF 2004
Shri Ramchandra Dnyanu Shinde, .. Petitioner
vs
Shri Ramrao Pandu Shinde, .. Respondent
Mr A.A.Kumbhakoni, i/b Mr T.D.Deshmukh, for the
petitioner.
Mr.R.V.More, for the respondent.
CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J.
DATE : 12th October, 2004.
PC:
1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This petition challenges the concurrent findings
recorded by the Courts below by which the prayer of the
petitioner for grant of status-quo has been rejected.
The petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for permanent
injunction restraining the respondent-defendant from
fetching water by electric motor from the well in
dispute and cutting teak trees. The
application-Exhibit-5 filed by the petitioner was
rejected by the order dated 18.7.2001. Even the
application Exhibit-44 filed by the petitioner seeking
status-quo of teak wood trees in Gat No.554 was also
rejected on the ground that Gat No.554 was not the suit
property. Thereafter, the petitioner seems to have
amended the suit and included Gat No.554 as the suit
property. Both the Courts below, after considering the
material placed before them, rejected the prayer seeking
status-quo of teak tress in Gat no.554. Keeping that in
view and considering that there are concurrent findings
recorded by both the Courts below and as I find that
there is sufficient material on record to sustain those
findings and considering the extremely limited
jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India to disturb the findings of fact,
the present writ petition cannot be entertained. The
writ petition, therefore, fails and is dismissed as
such.
3. Hearing of the suit is expedited.
(D.B.BHOSALE, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ court can disturb the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below regarding the rejection of status-quo prayers.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shri Ramchandra Dnyanu Shinde
Shri Ramrao Pandu Shinde
D.B. BHOASLE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court