Maharaj Shri Nathuram Sharma Anand ... vs Akhil Bharat Varshiya Audichya Brahm ... on 30 September, 2014

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Maharaj Shri Nathuram Sharma Anand ... vs Akhil Bharat Varshiya Audichya Brahm ... on 30 September, 2014

Bench: Ravi R.Tripathi

         C/CRA/307/2014                                        ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 307 of 2014

================================================================
 MAHARAJ SHRI NATHURAM SHARMA ANAND ASHRAM....Applicant(s)
                           Versus
AKHIL BHARAT VARSHIYA AUDICHYA BRAHM SAMAJ & 9....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR HD VASAVADA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SD RAMI, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1
================================================================

         CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI

                                Date : 30/09/2014


                                 ORAL ORDER

1. The applicant-original plaintiff is before this Court being aggrieved by an order passed by the Division Bench of Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad in Civil Revision Application No.11 of 2014 dated 27.8.2014. The operative part of the order reads as under:

"1. This Civil Revision Application is allowed.

2. The order passed by the learned trial Judge on 24.10.2013 below Application exh.20 in H.R.P.Suit No.575 of 2013 is hereby quashed and set aside.

Page 1 of 4 C/CRA/307/2014 ORDER

3. The appellant-tenant is permitted to carry out tenantable repairing work necessary for survival of students in the suit premises. The Appellant shall obtain necessary permission from Local Authority for execution of such repairing work. The Appellant shall not carry out any construction work which is of permanent nature or which changes the identity of the suit premises. The appellant tenant shall bear the costs of such repairing work. (Emphasis Supplied)

4. The appellant is ordered to produce ten photographs showing condition of the suit premises before repairing work viz. each five photographs should be from inner side of the suit premises and five photographs should be from outer side of the suit premises.

5. After completion of the tenantable repairing work, the appellant is ordered to produce ten photographs, out of which five photographs should be from inner side of the suit premises and five photographs should be from outer side of the suit premises to show the actual condition of the suit premises after completion of repairing work.

Page 2 of 4 C/CRA/307/2014 ORDER

6. The appellant shall have to complete the above repairing work within the period of fifteen days from the date of this order and after completion of such work, the appellant shall have to pass a pursis in this Court declaring that tenantable repairing work is over along with production of photographs and report.

7. Record and Proceedings be sent to the trial Court within 10 days from this order.

Pronounced in the open Court on this 27th day of August, 2014...."

2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Vasavada for the applicant-original plaintiff. Learned advocate submitted that in fact the applicant herein had the anxiety of carrying out the repairing work. It is also the anxiety on the part of the applicant that the tenant will not be able to carry out the repairing work (tenantable repairing work) as the tenant does not have funds for the same. As against that, the applicant- trust is having sufficient funds to carry out the repairs.

Page 3 of 4 C/CRA/307/2014 ORDER

3. Having perused the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the Small Causes Court, this Court is of the opinion that the Division Bench of Small Causes Court has not committed any error which warrants interference at the hands of this Court. Hence, this Civil Revision Application fails and the same is dismissed.

4. It is clarified that non-entertainment of this Civil Revision Application is not to be construed to mean that this Court is pronouncing on the rights of the parties other than the right which is conferred by the order under challenge in this Civil Revision Application viz. carrying out the tenantable repairs.

5. It is also clarified that this non- entertainment of this Civil Revision Application should not preclude the parties from exploring the possibility of having an amicable solution to the problem which is agitated by both the parties.

(RAVI R.TRIPATHI, J.) Srilatha Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court