This writ petition challenged the trial court's rejection of a prayer for separate registration of an application under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC. The court found no immediate prejudice and disposed of the petition without cost.
The writ petition was disposed of. No costs.
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.
(1) WP 1680.2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1680 OF 2011
Jijabai w/o. Nana Pagore PETITIONER
VERSUS
Rajendrakumar S/o. Madanlal Kala
and ors.
RESPONDENTS
.....
Mr. Balaji Shinde, Advocate with Mr. V.P. Latange,
Advocate for the Petitioner.
.....
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATED : 10TH MARCH, 2011
ORAL ORDER:-
1.Petitioner moved application for rejection
of application under Order 39 Rule 2-A of Code of
Civil Procedure on the ground that said proceeding
needed separate registration. Trial Court had
rejected that prayer.
2. Shri Latange contends that the proceedings
needed to be tried as an independent proceedings and
separate enquiry therefore needs to be conducted.
According to him, therefore, separate registration is
necessary and he is relying upon judgment of this
(2) WP 1680.2011
Court in the matter of Rampyaribai Wd/o Sukhdeo Daga
and ors. Vs. Niladevi wd/o Narayandas Jakhotiya
reported at2007 B.C.I. Page 83,particularly
paragraph 7 to substantiate his contention. Learned
counsel is however not in a position to show that any
prejudice is caused to the petitioner by impugned
order at this stage.
3. It is apparent that trial Court is aware of
the procedure to be followed and there is nothing on
record to show that the trial Court will not follow
that procedure. If the petitioner finds that
procedure is not being followed, he can always raise
appropriate grievance. With that liberty to the
petitioner, present Petition is disposed of. No
costs.
Sd/-
[B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.]
arp
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an application under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC requires separate registration as an independent proceeding.
Whether the petitioner can demonstrate prejudice from the trial court's rejection of that prayer at this stage.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rampyaribai Wd/o Sukhdeo Daga and ors. Vs. Niladevi wd/o Narayandas JakhotiyaReferred¶15
Rampyaribai Wd/o Sukhdeo Daga and ors. Vs. Niladevi wd/o Narayandas Jakhotiya reported at 2007 B.C.I. Page 83
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jijabai w/o. Nana Pagore
Rajendrakumar S/o. Madanlal Kala
B.P. DHARMADHIKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court