Allowed

Bhagwan Mhasu Pawar v. Janabai Arjun Hulgunde

Bombay HC21 Feb 2013WP/645/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge allowed a writ petition, quashing and setting aside an impugned order rejecting a temporary injunction application due to missing title deeds. The court directed the plaintiff to produce the sale deed for fresh consideration without deciding the merits of the property dispute.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; petitioner directed to produce sale deed in trial court for fresh consideration of injunction application.

Bhagwan Mhasu Pawar Vs Janabai Arjun Hulgunde — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

1 W.P. 645.2013

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 645 OF 2013

¶5

Bhagwan Mhasu Pawar V/s Janabai Arjun Hulgunde

¶6

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 : 21/02/2013

¶7

Mr. K.S.Bhore, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. A.D.Aghav, Advocate for the respondent.

¶8

PER COURT :

¶9

Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶10

It appears that the petitioner has not produced title deed before the Courts below at the time when the temporary injunction applications were decided. The Court has found that the plaintiff had not produced the sale deed on the basis of which he is claiming his right over the suit property and as such the lower Court has rightly rejected the application for temporary injunction.

¶11

Mr. Bhore, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits

¶12

2 W.P. 645.2013

¶13

that the sale deed could not be produced in the trial Court and now the said sale deed is available and the same would be produced.

¶14

The plaintiff/petitioner is directed to produce the sale deed on record in the trial Court and after the sale deed is produced, the Court shall decide the application [ Exh. 5 ] afresh. The parties are at liberty to produce such other documents at the time of deciding the application [ Exh. 5 ].

¶15

In view of the fact that the plaintiff is permitted to file the sale deed on record, I quash and set aside the impugned order. The trial Court shall decide the application [ Exh. 5 ] afresh.

¶16

It is made clear that I have not dilated on the merits of the matter and the orders are set aside only to facilitate the plaintiff to file on record and for the Court to consider the same.

¶17

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶18

[ S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. ]

¶19

KNP/W.P. 645.2013

Bhagwan Mhasu Pawar v. Janabai Arjun Hulgunde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagwan Mhasu Pawar v. Janabai Arjun Hulgunde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha Gokul Bhondve Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Suresh Bhimrao Jagdale Vs Vishnu Shridhar Mehunkar and Ors.

Pushpa Dyaneshwar Mahajan and Ors. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Vs Balaji Vithalrao Shinde

Pandit Dindayal Upadhaya Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit, Shahada Vs the Divisional Jt. Registrar, Co-Op Soc. Nashik and Ors.

Pramod Jaichand Sand Vs Rajani Ranjan Khanolkar and Ors.