Disposed

Shaikh Naim Shaikh Lal v. Sayyed Kaleem Sayyad Ismail and Others

Bombay HC3 Jan 2024CRA/206/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Aurangabad, finding that filing a Civil Revision Application against an interim order was unnecessary as the underlying Misc. Application required expedited disposal, disposed of the revision by directing the Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal to decide the Misc. Application within two months. The disposal was done without prejudice to the merits. The court did not allow or dismiss the ap

What did the court decide?

The Miscellaneous Civil Application No.15 of 2021 to be decided as early as possible and preferably within two months of receipt of this order.

Shaikh Naim Shaikh Lal Vs Sayyed Kaleem Sayyad… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:38

¶2

918 CRA-206-2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

918 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 206 OF 2023

¶5

SHAIKH NAIM SHAIKH LAL
VERSUS

¶6

SAYYED KALEEM SAYYAD ISMAIL AND OTHERS

¶7

Mr. P.S. Agrawal – Advocate for Petitioner

¶8

CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.
 DATE : 3rd January, 2024

¶9

PER COURT:

¶10

1. Heard learned Counsel for petitioner.

¶11

2.The Court vide order dated 5th December, 2023 has
directed the learned Counsel for the petitioner to satisfy as to
the present Revision Petition is maintainable against the
impugned order. It appears that, the present application is
filed for challenging order dated 20th September, 2023 whereby
the Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal, Aurangabad has granted
status–quo in relation to the execution of decree against

¶12

defendant Nos.2 to 6 in Misc. Civil Application No.15 of 2021.

¶13

Pooja K.

¶14

1/3

¶15

918 CRA-206-2023

¶16

3.Learned Counsel for petitioner pointed out that, despite
decree of vacation against the applicants in Misc. Application
No.15 of 2021, they have started second round of litigation
even after the earlier decree of vacation attained finality and in
that proceeding the Wakf Tribunal has unnecessarily stayed
the execution of earlier decree. He pointed out that, under
Section 83 (9) of the Wakf Act the present Revision Application
very much maintainable.

¶17

4.However, it appears that even after a vacation decree the
Misc. Application No.15 of 2021 filed by some of the tenants
against whom the vacation order is passed is being
entertained by the learned Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal and in
that application certain interim arrangements are made in
relation to execution of earlier decree. Under such
circumstances this Court is of the opinion that, instead of
entertaining present Civil Revision Application certain
directions to be given Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal for deciding
the Misc. Application No.15 of 2021 expeditiously. As such,
the present Civil Revision Application is disposed of with
direction to Maharashtra Wakf Tribunal at Aurangabad to

¶18

Pooja K.

¶19

2/3

¶20

918 CRA-206-2023

¶21

decide the Misc. Application No.15 of 2021 wherein the
impugned order dated 20.09.2023 is passed, as early as
possible and preferably within the period of two months from
the receipt of this order.

¶22

5. The Civil Revision Application is accordingly disposed of.

¶23

[ SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE ]

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Pooja K.

¶26

3/3

Shaikh Naim Shaikh Lal v. Sayyed Kaleem Sayyad Ismail and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaikh Naim Shaikh Lal v. Sayyed Kaleem Sayyad Ismail and Others

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

Idris Mohammad Rafique Bagwan (Proprietor of Idris Fruit Merchant Vs Shaikh Mustkim Shaikh Mobin @ Mustkim Mobin

Ankush Bajirao Dhotre and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arjun @ Abhishek Anil Joshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Syed Isaq Syed Ahmed Saudagar Vs Saleha Begum Sayed Ejaz Husain and Another

Rekha Harish Jain Vs Harish Jagdishchandra Jain

Rekha Harish Jain Vs Harish Jagdishchandra Jain