Shree Warana Mahila Sahkari Patsantha Ltd. through Chairman Smt. Chaya Vasant Barge vs Gramvikas Adhikari/ Grampanchayat — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shree Warana Mahila Sahkari Patsantha Ltd. through Chairman Smt. Chaya Vasant Barge vs Gramvikas Adhikari/ Grampanchayat — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Second Appeal No. 280 of 2025 admitted on two substantial questions of law; notice waived by respondents' counsel; record and proceedings called for; printing dispensed with; appellants to file a private paper book within one year; parties at liberty to explore amicable settlement. Interim Application No. 11899 of 2024: Rule on interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) made returnable on 18 June 2025; ad-interim protection granted by this Court continues during pendency; respondents may file affidavit-in-reply before the next date.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellants' suit for specific performance of the contract for extension of the lease period - on the ground that lease rent for a period of 15 years was accepted by the defendants - was erroneously dismissed on the ground of bar under Section 59 of The Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The second appeal is admitted on two substantial questions of law: (i) whether the dismissal of the appellants' suit for specific performance of the contract for extension of the lease period (lease rent for 15 years having been accepted by the defendants) on the ground of bar under Section 59 of The Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 was erroneous; and (ii) whether, possession being sourced from a registered lease document and absent any action for possession on the ground of alleged termination of the lease agreement, the appellants' prayer for injunction protecting possession could have been refused.

Key takeaways

On Interim Application No. 11899 of 2024, Rule has been made on interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a), made returnable on 18th June 2025.ratio¶30
The ad-interim protection granted by this Court shall continue during the pendency of the interim application.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction), Gauri Godse J., order dated 9 April 2025: Second Appeal No. 280 of 2025 (with Interim Application No. 11899 of 2024), Shree Warana Mahila Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd. through Chairman Smt. Chaya Vasant Barge v. Gramvikas Adhikari /Gram Panchayat through Rangrao Sayaji Yewale and Anr. The second appeal, arising from dismissal of the appellant society's suit for specific performance of a contract for extension of the lease period (lease rent for 15 years having been accepted by the defendants), is ADMITTED on two substantial questions of law: (i) whether that dismissal on the ground of bar under Section 59 of The Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 was erroneous; and (ii) whether, given possession flowing from a registered lease document and the absence of any action for possession following alleged termination of the lease agreement, the appellants' prayer for injunction protecting possession could have been refused. On the interim application, Rule on interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) is made returnable on 18 June 2025; ad-interim protection continues during pendency; respondents' counsel waived notice; record and proceedings called for; private paper book to be filed within one year; parties left free to explore amicable settlement.

16-SA-280-2025.docx

rrpillai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 280 OF 2025 WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 11899 OF 2024

Shree Warana Mahila Sahakari …

Appellant/Applicant

Patsanstha Ltd. Through

Chairman Smt. Chaya Vasant Barge

Vs.

Gramvikas Adhikari /Gram Panchayat through Rangrao Sayaji Yewale and Anr.

Respondents

Mr. Pratap Patil i/b. Mr. T. S. Shendge for the Appellant/Applicant. Mr. Y. S. Bhate for the Respondents.

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J.

DATE : 9^th APRIL 2025

ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the parties. The second appeal is

admitted on the following substantial questions of law :

(i) Whether the appellants’ suit for specific performance of

the contract for extension of the lease period on the ground of accepting lease rent for a period of 15 years was accepted by the defendants, is erroneously dismissed on the ground of bar

under Section 59 of The Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 ?

Digitally signed by RAJESHWARI RAJESHWARI RAMESH RAMESH PILLAI PILLAI Date: 2025.04.14 23:38:37 +0200

1/3

16-SA-280-2025.docx

(ii) Considering the source of possession of the appellant by way of a registered lease document and in the absence of any action initiated for possession on the ground of alleged termination of the lease agreement, whether the appellants’ prayer for injunction protecting possession could have been refused ?

Learned Advocate for the respondents waives notice.

Call for record and proceedings.

Printing is dispensed with.

Learned Advocate for the appellants shall file private paper book within one year from today.

Interim Application No. 11899 of 2024

Rule on interim relief in terms of prayer clause(a) is made returnable on 18^th June 2025.

Learned Advocate for the respondents waives notice.

Ad-interim protection granted by this court shall continue during the pendency of the application.

The respondents are at liberty to file their affidavit in reply

before the next date with an advance copy to the learned counsel for the appellant.

2/3

16-SA-280-2025.docx

Learned counsel for the appellant on instructions submits that

the appellant would be agreeable to exploring possibility of amicable settlement.

It is therefore clarified that though the second appeal is admitted, the parties are at liberty to explore possibility of an amicable settlement in the meantime.

[GAURI GODSE, J.]

3/3