Ganpati Rama Alias Ramchandra Pise vs Savita Devram Savalkar — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Ganpati Rama Alias Ramchandra Pise vs Savita Devram Savalkar — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim directions pending determination of the Writ Petition: (i) Trial Court directed to maintain status quo in RCS No. 166/2020 until the Writ Petition is determined; (ii) Respondent directed to remain present on the next adjourned date and comply with the directions contained in the order dated 15.03.2024; (iii) copy of this order to be served on Respondent by the learned Advocate for Petitioner; (iv) Praecipe disposed.

Issue for consideration

Whether allowing the Plaintiff's Application vide the impugned order dated 25.09.2023 under O. VI, R. 17 of the CPC (amendment introducing a prayer for partition of the suit property by metes and bounds), which is under challenge in this Writ Petition, would amount to changing the nature of the Suit proceedings.

Court's answer

Allowing the Plaintiff's Application vide the impugned order dated 25.09.2023 in the Application filed under O. VI, R. 17 of the CPC, which is under challenge in the present Writ Petition, would clearly amount to changing the nature of the Suit proceedings.

Ratio / Principle

In that view of the matter, the learned Trial Court is directed to maintain status quo in RCS No. 166/2020 until the present Writ Petition is determined by this Court.

Key takeaways

The notice issued on 15.03.2024 was obviously issued after application of mind, though proceedings before the Trial Court were not stayed by this Court.obiter¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Milind N. Jadhav, J.), order dated May 06, 2024 on praecipe dated 05.05.2024 in WRIT PETITION NO. 5609 OF 2024 (Ganpati Rama alias Ramchandra Pise & Ors. v. Savita Devram Savalkar). In a suit RCS No. 166/2020 seeking removal of encroachment, possession and mense profit, the Plaintiff had filed an Application under O. VI, R. 17 of the CPC after commencement of trial seeking amendment of the plaint to introduce a prayer for partition of the suit property by metes and bounds; the impugned order dated 25.09.2023 allowing that Application is under challenge in the Writ Petition. Noting that despite this Court's notice of 15.03.2024 (issued after application of mind, without staying Trial Court proceedings), the learned Trial Court had passed an order on 03.04.2024 referring to that notice and stating the Petitioner was delaying the matter, and that the Trial Court had taken cognizance thereof in paragraph No. 3 of its order, the Court passed an order stating that allowing the Plaintiff's Application vide the impugned order would clearly amount to changing the nature of the Suit proceedings, and directed the Trial Court to maintain status quo in RCS No. 166/2020 until the present Writ Petition is determined. Respondent directed to remain present on the next adjourned date and comply with the directions of the order dated 15.03.2024; copy of the order to be served by the Advocate for Petitioner; praecipe disposed.

P10. CIVIL WP-5609-2024.docx

Amberkar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 5609 OF 2024

Ganpati Rama alias Ramchandra Pise & Ors. .. Petitioners Versus Savita Devram Savalkar .. Respondent

Mr. S.R. Ghanavat for Petitioner

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : MAY 06, 2024

P. C.:

Not on board. Mentioned. Taken on board.

Perused the praecipe dated 05.05.2024.

Heard Mr. Ghanavat, learned Advocate for Petitioner.

By order dated 15.03.2024, this Court issued notice to the Respondent after hearing Mr. Ghanavat, learned Advocate for Petitioner. The notice was obviously issued after application of mind though proceedings before the Trial Court was not stayed by this Court. Suit in the present case seeks removal of encroachment, possession and mense profit. In that Suit, after commencement of trial, Plaintiff filed Application under O. VI, R. 17 of the CPC seeking amendment to the Suit plaint and sought introduction of the prayer for partition of the suit property by metes and bounds. Though the

1 of 3

P10. CIVIL WP-5609-2024.docx

aforesaid facts were not mentioned in the order dated 15.03.2024, the order issuing notice is quite clear.

Despite the above, learned Trial Court has audacity of passing the order on 03.04.2024 by making a reference to this order dated 15.03.2024 and stating that Petitioner is delaying the matter. Mr. Ghanavat would submit that learned Trial Court has kept the matter almost every day. It was listed on 03.05.2024 as well as today before the learned Trial Court.

Perusal of the order dated 03.04.2024 clearly shows that learned Trial Court has taken cognizance of the order dated 15.03.2024 in paragraph No. 3 of the order.

In view of the above, it is now compelling on this Court to pass an order stating that allowing of Application of the Plaintiff vide impugned order dated 25.09.2023 in Application filed under O. VI, R. 17 of the CPC which is under challenge in the present Writ Petition would clearly amount to changing the nature of the Suit proceedings. In that view of the matter, learned Trial Court is directed by this Court to maintain status quo in RCS No. 166/2020 until the present Writ Petition is determined by this Court.

Mr. Ghanavat would submit that he has complied with the directions contained in the order dated 15.03.2024 and Respondent

2 of 3

P10. CIVIL WP-5609-2024.docx

has been served. If that be the case, Respondent is directed to remain present on the next adjourned date and comply with the directions contained in the order dated 15.03.2024.

Copy of this order shall be served on Respondent by learned Advocate for Petitioner.

Praecipe disposed.

Amberkar

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA RAVINDRA MOHAN MOHAN AMBERKAR AMBERKAR Date: 2024.05.06 15:16:15 +0530

3 of 3