Dismissed

Ramdas Dada Mane v. Kamalbai Kisan Mane

Bombay HC22 Jul 2014CRA/108/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an application challenging the rejection of a preliminary issue application regarding jurisdiction. The Court held there was no illegality or material irregularity as the Civil Court had granted a hearing opportunity and jurisdiction was not ousted as injunction lies with Civil Courts.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Application fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Ramdas Dada Mane Vs Kamalbai Kisan Mane — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

C.R.A. No.108/14

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.108 OF 2014

¶5

Shri Ramdas Dada Mane, Age : 76 years, Occu. Agri., Presently residing at Karajgaon (Near Devkhile Vasti), Tal. Newasa, Dist. Ahmednagar

¶6

..APPLICANT (Orig. Defendant)

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sau. Kamalbai Kisan Mane, Age : 49, Occu. Service, R/o Tanpure Colony, A/p. Rahuri Factory, Tal. Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar ..RESPONDENT (Orig. Plaintiff)

¶9

CORAM : N.W. SAMBRE, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 22nd July, 2014

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

By the present writ petition, the applicant/original defendant challenges the order dated 28th April, 2014, passed by Civil Judge Junior Division, Newasa, below Exh.25, in Regular Civil Suit No.239 of 2013.

¶13

Respondent/original plaintiff has instituted Regular Civil Suit No.239

¶14

of 2013 for perpetual injunction and effecting entries of his name in the revenue record after fixing the boundaries of the land in question .

¶15

(2) C.R.A. No.108/14

¶16

The applicant/original defendant preferred application Exh.25 under section 9-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying therein framing of preliminary issue on the ground of jurisdiction.

¶17

The application Exh.25 came to be rejected by the learned Trial Judge by order dated 28th April, 2014.

¶18

The order impugned herein is assailed by the present applicant/defendant to the suit on two grounds, namely, (i) that in view of provisions of the Bombay Revenue Jurisdiction Act, Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and sought to place reliance on the prayer clause of the plaint and (ii) that the Trial Court has failed to frame preliminary issue and has not permitted the present applicant to lead evidence.

¶19

Having gone through the impugned order, it is noticed that the rejection of application Exh.25 is based upon the consideration of position of law and the fact that in the suit the plaintiff has also claimed injunction. Under the Provisions of the Bombay Revenue Jurisdiction Act, the authorities thereunder are not empowered to decide the issue of injunction, which power vests with the Civil Court. In that view of the matter, the contention of the present applicant that the Civil Court's jurisdiction is ousted is liable to be rejected. So far as the next contention

¶20

(3) C.R.A. No.108/14

¶21

of the applicant that the Civil Court has not framed an issue in support of the preliminary objection is also required to be negated in view of the fact that the Civil Court has granted opportunity of hearing to the present applicant. Just because an issue was not framed, same has not caused any prejudice to the present applicant, at least no such prejudice is demonstrated by him.

¶22

In the light of above, no illegality or material irregularity is noticed in the impugned order. No interference is called for. In the result, Civil Revision Application fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶23

(N.W. SAMBRE, J.)

¶24

amj

Ramdas Dada Mane v. Kamalbai Kisan Mane

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramdas Dada Mane v. Kamalbai Kisan Mane

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Social and Cultural Association at Kusumba and Another Vs Chandrakant Mahadu Chaudhari

Syed Hidayat Sayed Lal Jagirdar Vs Manjoorkha Iqbalkha Jamadar and Others

Usman Baig Hussain Baig and Others Vs Shaikh Nizam Shaikh Jainoddin and Another

The President Hari Om Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Neknoor Dist Beed and Ors. Vs Sukhdeo Namdeo Zirpe and Ors.

Syed Abdul Rafiquoddin Syed Rahimoddin Vs Mohd. Abdul Shaikh Ahmad

Pravin Kundlik Narwade Vs Eshwarsing Fakirsing Tatu