This order dismisses a civil revision application challenging the rejection of a suit withdrawal. The court held no interference was warranted but clarified the order does not bar prosecution of a pending specific performance suit.
Civil Revision Application No.52 of 2012 dismissed.
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.
cra-52.12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.52 OF 2012
M/s. Pawan Associates : Applicants. Versus Smt. Bhagubai Namdeo Landge and ors. : Respondents.
Mr. N V Walawalkar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Suresh M Sabrad for the Applicants. Mr. Vijay Patil with Mr. Vivek Tadke for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6. Mr. D D Shinde for the Respondent Nos.8 to 11.
CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 19th March 2013
P.C.
1 The order dated 6/1/2012 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune on the application Exhibit 1 for withdrawal of the suit in question is the subject matter of the above Civil Revision Application.
2 Considering the reasons mentioned for rejection of the said application for withdrawal, no exception could be taken to the said reasons. Hence no interference is called for with the impugned order. The above Civil Revision Application is accordingly dismissed. However, it is clarified that the impugned order would not come in the way of the Applicants herein in prosecuting the suit for specific performance being Special Civil Suit No.201 of 2013 pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune. The
1 of 2
lgc
cra-52.12
contentions of the parties as regards the Power of Attorney in question are explicitly kept open for being urged before the concerned Court.
[R.M.SAVANT, J]
2 of 2
lgc
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order rejecting the application for withdrawal of suit requires interference.
M/s. Pawan Associates
Smt. Bhagubai Namdeo Landge and ors.
R. M. Savant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
