The High Court Bench at Aurangabad dismissed a writ petition filed challenging an order by the Trial Court rejecting an application for appointment of a Court Commissioner. The court held there was no substance in the petition.
There is no costs.
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.
1
960 WP.12992.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
960 WRIT PETITION NO. 12992 OF 2017
SHAIKH MEENA SHAIKH ABDUL VERSUS
SAYYED JAKER SAYYED SHAHABUDDIN AND ANOTHER
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Dhiraj R. Jethliya. Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. V. D. Gunale.
CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J. DATE : 08th November, 2017.
ORDER :
no boundary dispute between the parties. The Respondent / Plaintiff has instituted the suit simplicitor for perpetual injunction. By way of counter claim, the Petitioner / Defendant has claimed the declaration about the easementary rights in respect of the use of the public road and the relief of mandatory injunction. On perusal of the application Exhibit 90, most particularly para 4 of the application, it appears that the Petitioner / Defendant sought the appointment of Court Commissioner on five points i.e. (a) to (e) as mentioned in para 4 of the application. On careful perusal of the said points, it appears that the Petitioner / original Defendant is intending to collect the evidence by filing application Exhibit 90. Furthermore, the suit is of the year 2011 and in the year 2013, the issues came to be framed. It further
2
960 WP.12992.17.odt
appears that the Respondent / Plaintiff has completed his evidence and from April 2017 the suit is pending for the evidence of Petitioner / Defendant. Instead of adducing the evidence, the Petitioner / Defendant has filed this application at the belated stage in the month of June 2017. The learned Judge of the Trial Court has rightly rejected the application. I do no find any fault in the impugned order. There is no substance in the writ petition. The writ petition is hereby dismissed.
No costs.
[ V. K. JADHAV, J. ]
ndm
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can find fault with the Learned Judge of the Trial Court who rejected a belated application for appointment of a Court Commissioner.
Whether there is any substance in the writ petition challenging the order in a suit for perpetual injunction and counter claim.
SHAIKH MEENA SHAIKH ABDUL
SAYYED JAKER SAYYED SHAHABUDDIN
AND ANOTHER
V. K. JADHAV
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
