In a writ petition, this court set aside an order by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal that vacated a twelve-year stay order. The court restored the stay and directed expeditious disposal of the Revision Application.
Set aside impugned order, restore stay order, dispose of subject matter expeditiously by 2023
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.
06-WP-5224-2022.doc
Arjun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5224 OF 2022
Digitally signed by ARJUN ARJUN VITTHAL VITTHAL KUDHEKAR KUDHEKAR Date: 2022.11.18 19:12:48 +0530
Bajirao Sitaram Gaikwad (deceased) …Petitioners through Legal Heirs 1A) Shri. Baban Bajirao Gaikwad & Ors.
V/s.
Sou. Jijabai Laxman Jagtap & Anr.
…Respondents
Mr. Abhijit P. Kulkarni, for the Petitioners. Mr. P. B. Gujar, for the Respondents.
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 18th NOVEMBER, 2022
P.C.:
1. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioners are challenging
order dated 23rd December, 2021 passed by learned Member (Judicial), Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune in Tenancy Revision Application No.550 of 2008 by which, order of stay dated 7th October, 2009 which was in operation for about 12 years was vacated.
2. It appears that, during the hearing before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune, Advocate of the Petitioners was not present in the morning session on 7th
1
06-WP-5224-2022.doc
October, 2019. It is stated that learned Advocate was busy in District Court, Pune and his assistant Advocate requested to keep back the matter. However, in the morning session stay granted on 7th October, 2009 was vacated. Thereafter, immediately in the afternoon session, learned Advocate of the Petitioners remained present and requested for continuation of stay order and by the impugned order his request was rejected.
3. Mr. Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners states that the Revision has been fixed for hearing and arguments of the Petitioners i.e. the Applicants were completed. The Respondent's Advocate is now arguing the matter and the matter is part heard.
4. In view of above position, the interest of justice will be served if the said Revision Application No. 550/2008/NS is disposed of in time bound manner and, till that time, the interim relief which was in operation for about 12 years is continued.
5. For above reasons the impugned order dated 23rd December, 2021 passed by learned Member (Judicial), Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune is set aside and
2
06-WP-5224-2022.doc
consecutively the order dated 7th October, 2009 by which the stay was granted is restored.
6. The learned Member (Judicial), Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Pune is requested to dispose of the Revision Application No. TNC/REV/550/2008/NS expeditiously by 31st January, 2023.
7. Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms with no order as to costs.
(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.)
3
Bajirao Sitaram Gaikwad (deceased) Legal Heirs
Sou. Jijabai Laxman Jagtap
Madhav J. Jamdar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
