The High Court Bench at Aurangabad dismissed the limited petition withdrawn by the petitioner with liberty to seek appropriate reliefs from the trial court, noting the lack of substantive appeal against compromise-based consent orders.
Liberty granted to approach the trial Court for appropriate reliefs under the Code of Civil Procedure.
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 -
WP 5219/17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.5219/2017
Mudrika Ranjana Sanjay Abuj.
...Petitioner..
Versus
Sanjay Uttaramrao Abuj.
...Respondent...
.....
Shri C.V. Thombre, Advocate for petitioner.
.....
CORAM: M.S. SANKLECHA, J.
DATE: 20.04.2017
ORDER :
1]This petition challenges the order dated 16.12.2016
passed by the Principal District Judge, Beed. The
impugned order rejected the petitioner’s appeal on
account of it being barred by limitation. The appeal
itself arose from an order passed consequent to a
compromise arrived at between the parties before the
trial Court. The impugned order while rejecting the
petitioner’s appeal on the ground that the delay has not
been satisfactorily explained invited attention to the
WP 5219/17
- 2 -
decision of this Court in Girja Shankar G. Gupta & others v. Shanil Builders & others (2013 (9) LJSOFT 35) wherein this Court has held that no substantive appeal lies against order passed in accordance with the consent terms arrived at between the parties, by virtue of Section 96(3) read with Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
2]Mr.C.V. Thombre, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, seeks to withdraw this petition with liberty
to approach the trial Court for appropriate reliefs under
the Code of Civil Procedure. Liberty as sought for is
granted. Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the
liberty as aforesaid.
ndk/ c204173.doc
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal against the impugned order was barred by limitation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Girja Shankar G. Gupta & others v. Shanil Builders & othersReferred¶2
Girja Shankar G. Gupta & others v. Shanil Builders & others (2013 (9) LJSOFT 35)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mudrika Ranjana Sanjay Abuj
Sanjay Uttaramrao Abuj
M.S. SANKLECHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court