Smt. Mangala Premsukh Dabi & Ors. v. Smt. Sharada Ramesh Ozha & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 02 Aug 2011
- Bench
- A S OKA
Outcome
Allowed
The writ petition is allowed on above terms
Provisions considered
Judgment
Smt. Mangala Premsukh Dabi and others. ... Petitioners Versus Smt. Sharada Ramesh Ozha and others. ... Respondents Mr. S.S.Patwardhan for the Petitioners. ----- Mr. Jaydeep S. Deo for Respondent Nos.1 to 4. ----- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 02nd August, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2 3 Taken up for final disposal. The Respondents are the original plaintiffs and the Petitioners are the original defendants Nos.1 to 4. A suit for eviction was filed by the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 against the Petitioners. The 2 92 wp.3650.10 eviction was sought under the provisions of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The trial Court decreed the suit. The appeal preferred by the Petitioners against the decree is pending. An application for amendment of the memorandum of the appeal was made by the Petitioners for adding grounds.
By the impugned judgment and order dated 10th February, 2010, the said application has been rejected by the learned District Judge. 4 After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I find that the approach of the learned District Judge is erroneous. The learned District Judge has completely overlooked the Rule 2 of Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. At the time of hearing of the appeal, with the leave of the Appellate Court, it is always open for an Appellant to urge the objections not set forth in the memorandum of the appeal. All that the Petitioners prayed for was for grant of permission to add the grounds of objections in the memorandum of appeal. Even if grounds are permitted to be 3 92 wp.3650.10 added, the question whether the Petitioners are entitled to urge the said grounds of objections at the time of hearing always remains open. Therefore, there was no reason to deny the prayer for grant of permission to add grounds in memorandum of appeal.
Operative part
5 Hence, the petition must succeed and I pass the following order: i. The impugned order dated 10th February, 2010 is quashed and set aside ; ii. The application at Exhibit – 29 is allowed ; iii. Whether the Petitioners are entitled to urge the objections permitted to be added by application at Exhibit – 29 is an issue which will be decided by the Appellate Court at the time of final hearing of the appeal and all the contentions of parties in that behalf are kept open ; iv. The writ petition is allowed on above terms ; 4 92 wp.3650.10 v. Hearing of the appeal is expedited ; vi. The Appellate Court shall make an endeavour to conclude the hearing of the appeal before the end of December 2011 ; and vii. Amendment shall be carried out within a period of two weeks from the date of which writ of this order is received by the Appellate Court.
[ A.S.OKA, J ]
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition is allowed on above terms
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 02 Aug 2011. The bench was A S OKA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.