Dismissed

Gorakshanath Laxman Dere and Another v. Ravi Savleram Dere and Others

Bombay HC22 Apr 2013WP/934/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-sentence judgment dismissed a writ petition challenging an order appointing a Court Commissioner to measure land. The court held that no error existed regarding the properties specified in the pleadings, though a final decision on the plaintiff's amendment regarding additional land remained pending with the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; parties directed to cooperate with Court Commissioner for measurement of the specified properties.

Gorakshanath Laxman Dere and Another Vs Ravi Savleram Dere… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

1 W.P. 934.2013

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 934 OF 2013

¶5

Gorakshanath Laxman Dere & Anr. V/s Ravi Savliram Dere & Ors.

¶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 : 22/04/2013

¶7

Mr. A.K.Gawali, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Sandeep S. Deshmukh, Advocate for Resp. Nos. 1 to 3.

¶8

PER COURT :

¶9

The order appointing T.I.L.R. as Court Commissioner to measure G.Nos. 57 and 58 is allowed. Aggrieved thereby the present Writ Petition is filed.

¶10

Mr. Gawali, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that along with G.No. 57 and 58 even G.No. 53 ought to have been directed to be measured. The learned counsel submits that G.No. 53 is relevant and the measurement of G.No. 53 along with G.No. 57 and 58 would assist the Court in arriving at just conclusion. The plaintiff has filed an application for amendment in the plaint and even from that point of view, the measurement of G.No. 53

¶11

2 W.P. 934.2013

¶12

along with G.No. 57 and 58 would be necessary.

¶13

Mr. Deshmukh, the learned counsel for the respondents supports the order.

¶14

The relief is claimed by the plaintiff in respect of G.No. 58 as it appears from the pleadings in the plaint. The suit property is also G.No. 58. According to the pleadings in the plaint, the land G.No. 57 is to the North of the suit property and the respondents are trying to interfere and obstruct the possession of the plaintiff.

¶15

In that light, the Court has directed measurement of G.Nos. 57 and 58. Today the application for amendment filed by the plaintiff is pending consideration with the trial Court. Be that as it may. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties as it exists, no error can be found in the order passed by the trial Court. As such, no case for interference is made out under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶16

The Writ Petition as such is dismissed. No costs.

¶17

Needless to state that after the evidence is recorded, if the Court finds that measurement of some other property is also necessary, the parties may apply, which application the Court would consider on its own merits.

¶18

3 W.P. 934.2013

¶19

The parties shall co-operate with the T.I.L.R. in carrying out the measurement as per the writ issued by the trial Court.

¶20

[ S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. ]

¶21

KNP/W.P. 934.2013

Gorakshanath Laxman Dere and Another v. Ravi Savleram Dere and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gorakshanath Laxman Dere and Another v. Ravi Savleram Dere and Others

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

Mahboob Khan Bismillah Khan and Another Vs Sk. Imam Sk. Ali and Another

Sangram Bhanudas Athare and Others Vs Jijabai Dattatraya Mahanor and Others

Uttamrao Wamanrao Sanap and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vishwambhar Gahininath Kale and Ors. Vs Special Recovery Officer, Vasant Dada Nagri Sahakari Bank Ltd. and Anr.

Manoj Madhukar Gaikwad Vs Ahmednagar Municipal Corporation

Pankaj Hirachand Koli Vs Hirachand Devichand Koli and Another