Disposed

Mithalal Pukhraj Jain and Ors. v. M/S. Mahalaxmi Developers, through Its Partner and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Dec 2017WP/13986/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Single Judge Writ Petition addresses the Petitioners' inability to act on consent terms due to untraceable court records. The Court directed the trial Court to take steps to trace the record and, if unsuccessful, allow reconstruction based on papers from both sides.

What did the court decide?

Directed the trial Court to trace the record within two weeks and, if not found, to allow reconstruction based on papers from both sides.

Mithalal Pukhraj Jain and Ors. Vs M/S… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

930.wpst.33209-17.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

Writ Petition (ST) NO. 33209 OF 2017

¶5

Mithalal Pukhraj Jain And Ors.

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s. Mahalaxmi Developers,

¶9

And Ors.

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

Mr.M. Vishwakarma, Advocate for the Petitioners.

¶12

CORAM : SHANTANU KEMKAR & R. G. KETKAR, JJ.

¶13

DATE : DECEMBER 12, 2017

¶14

P.C.

¶15

The case of the Petitioners is that after the consent terms dated 11.5.2016 in Special Civil Suit No.113/2015 were submitted by the parties before the Civil Judge, Senior Division Court, Panvel, the record of Court proceedings is not traceable. In the circumstances, the parties are not able to act upon the consent terms dated 11.5.2016.

¶16

It is the case of the Petitioners that on 23.11.2017, they had filed an application before the trial Court seeking reconstruction of the Court brief for drawing decree as per the consent terms. On the said application, the matter was directed

¶17

1 / 2

¶18

¶19

930.wpst.33209-17.doc

¶20

to be placed on 28.11.2017 and thereafter now the matter is adjourned. The grievance of the Petitioners is that the Petitioners are suffering hardship because of non-availability of the record and because of which there is inability of the trial Court to draw a decree.

¶21

Having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, we dispose of this Petition by directing the trial Court to take appropriate decision in respect of said application dated 27.11.2017 and make endeavour to trace the record of the case.

¶22

Let necessary action/steps be taken by the trial Court within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In case the record is not traceable, the trial Court is free to take decision in regard to reconstruction of the record by getting necessary papers from both sides within one month thereafter.

¶23

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶24

(R. G. KETKAR, J.) (SHANTANU KEMKAR, J.)

¶25

Deshmane (PS)

¶26

2 / 2

Mithalal Pukhraj Jain and Ors. v. M/S. Mahalaxmi Developers, through Its Partner and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithalal Pukhraj Jain and Ors. v. M/S. Mahalaxmi Developers, through Its Partner and Ors.

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

Venkatesh Sadan Co-Operative Housing Society Limited Vs State of Maharashtra (Revenue Department) and 3 Ors.

Azmoddin Munir Shaikh Vs the Zilla Parishad, Solapur and Anr.

The Oaisis Alcohol India Pvt.Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Patil Tukaram Bhagwan Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Shri. Lengare Vishnu Nivrutti Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Shri. Patil Tukaram Bhagwan Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.