Partly allowed

Dr. N. Sudhirkumar Alias Dr. Sudhirkumar and Ors. v. Shri Madhusudan Hiralal Malu and Anr.

Bombay HC27 Jul 2017AO/551/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An incumbent appeal against a decision of the Court of Small Causes was held infructuous as the plaint required re-presentation due to a landlord-tenant jurisdiction issue. The civil applications also stood disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as infructuous; civil applications disposed of as infructuous with no order as to costs.

Dr. N. Sudhirkumar Alias Dr. Sudhirkumar and Ors. Vs Shri… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

911-AOST35715-16.DOC

¶2

Atul

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER ST NO. 35715 OF 2016

¶4

WITH

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION ST NO. 35716 OF 2016 AND

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION ST NO. 4990 OF 2017

¶7

N Sudhirkumar alias Dr Sudhirkumar & Ors…Appellants
Versus

¶8

Madhusudan Hiralal Malu & Anr…Respondents

¶9

Mr Siddharth Ronghe, for the Appellants.
Mr Vishwajit P Sawant, with Nikhil Patil & Prabhakar M Jadhav,
for the Respondents.

¶10

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 27th July 2017

¶11

PC:-

¶12

1.The appeal is infructuous. The question of whether or not on
a finding that there was a landlord-tenant relationship, the City Civil
Court ought to have returned the plaint for presentation to the
proper Court or rejected the suit or dismissed it is kept open for an
appropriate case.

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

27th July 2017

¶15

911-AOST35715-16.DOC

¶16

2.The plaint has been presented in the Court of Small Causes
and the defendants (appellants herein) have filed their written
statement.

¶17

3.One thing to be noted is that while the plaint was to be re-
presented, apparently so too was the written statement. This is
confirmed because the appellants agree that paragraph 3 of the
written statement is inadvertently carried forward from the
pleadings in the City Civil Court. This is clear because the challenge
in paragraph 3 is to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. It is agreed
that paragraph 3 of the written statement will need to be deleted.
The defendants will make necessary application before the learned
Judge of the Court of Small Causes for amendment to the written
statement.

¶18

4.The appeal is disposed of in these terms. There will be no
order as to costs.

¶19

5.Both the civil applications do not survive and are disposed of
as infructuous.

¶20

(G. S. PATEL, J)

¶21

Page 2 of 2

¶22

27th July 2017

Dr. N. Sudhirkumar Alias Dr. Sudhirkumar and Ors. v. Shri Madhusudan Hiralal Malu and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. N. Sudhirkumar Alias Dr. Sudhirkumar and Ors. v. Shri Madhusudan Hiralal Malu and Anr.

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

Shaikh Toufik Shakil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and Ors. Vs Smt. Veena Jadhav and Ors.

Paper Products Kamgar Sanghatana through Its Secretary Shri. Samir J. Chavan Vs the Paper Products Ltd. and Anr.

Lt. Col. R.K. Rai Vs Sukhwant Kartar Singh and Ors.

Tarikh Aphak Khan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amit Bansi Chavan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra