Petitioner sought direction to HPCL to enter her as dealer despite inter-se disputes among heirs. Court directed HPCL to decide within eight weeks and parties to cooperate, disposing case without expressing opinion on merits.
Directing HPCL to decide the dealership reconstitution within eight weeks.
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.
WP No.4999/2012
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
GAYABAI SHANKARRAO JANJAL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS
Advocate for Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhandari Anand P. A P Malani
Mrs. AV Gondhalekar, AGP for Respondent/s: 1
Smt. Anjali Dube, Advocate for Respondent/s : 2
Mr.Vijay Y. Patil, Advocate for Respondent/s : 3 to 5.
CORAM: NARESH H.PATIL &
A.B.CHOUDHARI,JJ.
DATE :28th August,2012.
PER COURT :
1)Heard. The petitioner prayed for a
direction to Respondent No.2 – Hindustan Petroleum
corporation Ltd. (for short, the Corporation) to
enter her name in the Dealership Agreement of retail
outlet under the name and style "M/s Shiveshwar
Petroleum", at Chincholi.
2)According to the petitioner, original
proprietor/dealer of the retail outlet was
petitioner's son, namely Nana Shankar Janjal, who
died on 5th August, 2007.
3)The Respondent Nos.3 to 5 have filed the
proceedings being MARJI NO.684/2007, wherein the
2 WP No.4999/2012
Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad has,
on 4th July, 2011, passed the following order :
"1.Application is allowed.
2.Issue heirship certificate in the
name of applicant No.1 to 3 and
respondent No.2 in respect of the fair
price shop having license No.257/2003
and petrol pump having license No.
P/WC/MH/14/5206 (P171085), on payment
of necessary stamp duty.
3.Petitioner No.1 to 3 shall pay
3/4th stamp duty and respondent No.2
shall pay 1/4th stamp duty.
4.Parties to bear their respective
costs."
4)It is clear that both the parties to the
aforesaid proceedings have not challenged the said
order and they have accepted the same.
5)The grievance of the petitioner is, that
without authority and without complying the process of
reconstitution, the petrol pump/retail outlet is being
allowed to run and operate by Respondent No.3 – Smt.
Meerabai Nana Janjal, who happens to be wife of
deceased Nana Shankar Janjal.
6)Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits
3 WP No.4999/2012
that till the interse dispute/issue is resolved, the
petrol pump/retail outlet be directed to be closed and
the HPCL Corporation be directed to take appropriate
decision in this regard.
7)Learned Counsel appearing for the HPCL
Corporation submits that normally in case husband
dies, the Corporation allows wife of deceased husband
to run and operate the retail outlet. In the present
case, in view of the order passed by the civil court,
the Corporation has intimated both the parties to
approach the Corporation for further process of
reconstitution as per the Court's order. However, the
parties are not cooperating with the Corporation and,
therefore, the Corporation is unable to take a
decision in the matter.
8)Allotment of dealership; cancellation of
dealership etc. flow from contractual relationships
between the parties. The Corporation is expected to
act in accordance with the policy laid down in this
behalf by the Corporation.
9)In the facts of the case, we direct the HPCL
Corporation to take appropriate decision in this
regard within a period of eight weeks from today.
10)The parties are expected to cooperate the
Corporation by filing appropriate application or
causing their appearance before the authorities of the
Corporation. In case the parties do not cooperate
with the Corporation, the Corporation is free to take
WP No.4999/2012
4
its decision.
11)With these directions, the petition is
disposed of with no order as to costs. We have not
expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
(A.B.CHOUDHARI) (NARESH H.PATIL)
JUDGE JUDGE
bdv/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the HPCL Corporation should be directed to decide on the dealership reconstitution in view of disputes among heirs.
Whether the Court can adjudicate on the merits of inter-se disputes between parties regarding dealership succession.
GAYABAI SHANKARRAO JANJAL
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.
SMT. MEERABAI NANA JANJAL
NARESH H.PATIL
A.B.CHOUDHARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court