Disposed

Mumtaz Ali Mohammed Hussain and Ors. v. Gulam Rasul Dadamiya, Died Thr. L.Rs. Zainoddin and Ors.

Bombay HC3 May 2012WP/1464/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad did not interfere in the writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Leave was given to the petitioner to raise contentions regarding the dismissal of their application for dismissal of a suit at the time of the Suit's adjudication.

What did the court decide?

None; liberty granted to raise contentions at Suit adjudication.

Mumtaz Ali Mohammed Hussain and Ors. Vs Gulam… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

1 W.P. 1464.2012

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1464 OF 2012

¶5

Office Notes,Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram,appearances, ................................ Court's orders or CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. directions and Registrar's orders DATE : 03/05/2012.

¶6

Mr. Shaikh Mujtaba Gulam Mustafa, Advocate for the Petitioner.

¶7

Mrs. M.A.Kulkarni, Advocate for Resp. Nos. 1-A to 7.

¶8

PER COURT :

¶9

The petitioner had moved an application for dismissal of the Suit invoking the provisions of Order 23 ( 3 ) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The said application is rejected.

¶10

Mr. Shaikh Mujtaba, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the legal representatives of Gulam Rasul themselves have sold the property and are now claiming partition. The compromise is entered into between the plaintiff and defendant nos. 9 to 12 and defendant nos. 2 to 5. The petitioner is purchaser from the legal representatives of the original plaintiff. In view of that, the Suit can not be proceeded

¶11

2 W.P. 1464.2012

¶12

further and deserves to be dismissed as against the present petitioner. The learned Judge has not considered these aspects of the matter and on erroneous count, has rejected the application.

¶13

Mrs. Kulkarni, learned counsel for the respondents supports the order.

¶14

All the contentions raised by the petitioner and argued by Mr. Shaikh Mujtaba, learned counsel can be considered by the Court at the time deciding the Suit. At this stage, it would be too premature to consider all these aspects.

¶15

In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere in the writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and I dispose of the Writ Petition keeping all the points, as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, open. The petitioner shall have liberty to raise all these points at the time of adjudication of the Suit. No costs.

¶16

[ S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J. ]

¶17

KNP/W.P. 1464.2012

¶18

3 W.P. 1464.2012

Mumtaz Ali Mohammed Hussain and Ors. v. Gulam Rasul Dadamiya, Died Thr. L.Rs. Zainoddin and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mumtaz Ali Mohammed Hussain and Ors. v. Gulam Rasul Dadamiya, Died Thr. L.Rs. Zainoddin and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Ramrao Bodkhe Vs Sandhu Karbhari Khade (Died) Lrs Tarabai Sandu Khade and Ors.

Narsing Matsya Vyavsaik Sahakari Sanstha, Vanwada Latur Thru Secretary Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Tapi Parisar Vidya Mandal Thr. Its Chairman Vs Dr. Pramod Ghansham Ingle and Anr.

Latabai Vitthal Patil Vs the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Div. and Ors.

Dattatraya Raghunath Kokadwar Vs Pankaj Kamalkishor Maliwal and Ors.

The Returning Officer for Zp and Ps Election Vs Sanjiwani @ Sanjay Shivaji Rathod and Ors.