Judges: Hon’ble R.Y. Ganoo
Reg no: 78/2012
Filing no: 17108/2011
CNR: HCBM010245372011
Judicial Section: Civ
Bench Type: Single
Sorry, no records were found. Please adjust your search criteria and try again.
Sorry, unable to load the Maps API.
Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.78 OF 2012 Om Prakash Dharampal Agarwal .. Applicant Vs. Niranjan Dharmadas Chawla and Anr. .. Respondents Mr.Rafeeq Peermohideen i/b. Mr.Jeetendra Sachdev, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. Sanjay Kshirsagar, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATE : MARCH 31, 2012 P.C.: I have heard the learned advocates on both sides. Applicant is the original defendant No.1 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune in Special Civil Suit No.643 of 2008. The present applicant is an auction purchaser in regard to the property which was put up for sale by Respondent No.2 Central Bank of India to the extent of 5500 sq. ft. The total area according to the plaintiffs/Respondent No.1 is 6854.2 sq. ft. The Respondent No.1 wants a declaration from the learned Trial Judge in Civil Court that he continues to be the owner in respect of the property admeasuring 1354.2 sq. ft. of the description in the prayer clause (f). pmw 1 Learned advocate for the applicant wanted to contend that Recovery Officer of the Debt Recovery Tribunal will be the competent authority to resolve the dispute raised in the present plaint and, therefore, this court will have no jurisdiction. This contention of the learned Advocate for the applicant cannot sustain because the point raised by the present Respondent No.1 in the aforesaid suit is not concerning the sale of property of a particular description but he wants a declaration that he is the owner and continues to be so in respect of the property described in the plaint and prayer clause (f). Surely, such declaration can be granted by Civil Court and by no other court. In view of the above, the application is dismissed as no interference is required in the impugned order. There shall be no orders as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO, J.)
Respondent-1: Nirajan Dharmadas Chawla& Anr.
Petitioner-1: Om Prakash Dharampal Agarwal
Date - 1: 01/07/2011
Status: Case Filed
Details: 1 Jul 2011
Filing No: 17108/2011
Purpose: C.R.A. FOR ADMISSION(FRESH)[CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]
Date - 2: 25/01/2012
Status: Case Registered
Details: Registration No: 78/2012
Date - 3: 02/03/2012
Status: C.R.A. For Admission(Fresh)[Civil Side Matters]
Details: Before: Hon'Ble Hon'Ble Smt. Justice R.S. Dalvi
Date - 4: 02/03/2012
Status: First Hearing
Details: Initial hearing scheduled
Date - 5: 31/03/2012
Status: C.R.A. For Admission(Fresh)[Civil Side Matters]
Details: Before: Hon'Ble Hon'Ble Shri Justice R.Y. Ganoo
Date - 6: 31/03/2012
Status: C.R.A. For Admission(Fresh)[Civil Side Matters]
Details: Before: Hon'Ble Hon'Ble Shri Justice R.Y. Ganoo
Date - 7: 31/03/2012
Status: Disposed
Date - 8: 31/03/2012
Status: Order(1)
Date - 9: 31/03/2012
Status: Disposed
Details: Final Status
1) Document Filed: Vakalatnama
Advocate: Shri.Sanjay Kshirsagar(For R.No.1)
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 1: 22/08/2011