Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ratneshwar S/O Trimbakappa Kore vs Manmathappa Pandbappa Lokhande on 27 February, 2014
b#
ITEM NO.MM-4A Court No.4 SECTION IX
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).5915/2014
(From the judgement and order dated 06/02/2014 in SA No.32/2014 of The
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD)
RATNESHWAR S/O TRIMBAKAPPA KORE & ORS ETC. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
MANMATHAPPA PANDBAPPA LOKHANDE & ORS Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned Judgment and
exemption from filing O.T. and with prayer for interim relief)
WITH SLP(C) NO. 5990-5991 of 2014
(With prayer for interim relief and office report)
Date: 27/02/2014 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE B.S. CHAUHAN
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Chetpat Aryama Sundaram, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Paramjit Singh Patwalia, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. B.H. Marlapalle, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sudhanshu S.Choudhari,Adv.
Mr. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Taken on board.
Leave granted.
The appeals stand disposed of in terms of the signed order. | (DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) |(M.S. NEGI) | | Court Master | Assistant Registrar | (Signed order is placed on the file) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 2931 OF 2014 (Arising out of SLP(C) No(s). 5915 of 2014) RATNESHWAR S/O TRIMBAKAPPA KORE & ORS ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS MANMATHAPPA PANDBAPPA LOKHANDE & ORS Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 2932-2933 OF 2014 (Arising out of SLP(C) No(s). 5990-5991 of 2014) O R D E R Taken on board.
Leave granted.
Heard Mr. C.A. Sundaram and Mr. Paramjit Singh Patwalia, learned senior counsel for the appellants and Mr. B.H. Marlapalle, learned senior counsel and Mr. Sudhanshu S. Chaudhari, learned counsel for the respondents.
Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, learned counsel represents all the respondents.
We have gone through the impugned judgment and order of the High Court and we are satisfied that the High Court ought not to have disposed of the Appeal against the judgment and order of the learned District Judge in such a cryptic manner. In fact, it was not an appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 which requires to be entertained only if a substantial question of law arises therein. In fact, in the Appeal, the High Court ought to have gone through all the factual and legal controversies and adjudicated upon them after hearing all the parties concerned.
-2-In view thereof, the judgment impugned before us is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the High Court for reconsideration. Parties are at liberty to raise all factual and legal issues and may seek any appropriate interim relief moving the appropriate application for management of the society during the pendency of the appeals. We request the High Court to dispose of the appeals expeditiously.
With these observations, all the appeals stand disposed of.
.....................J. (Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN) ....................J. (J. CHELAMESWAR) NEW DELHI FEBRUARY 27, 2014.