Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/1049120/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10491 of 2008
=========================================================
PRAGJI
JANABHAI VALA & 6 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
MAMLATDAR
& 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
NIRZAR S DESAI for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 7.
None
for Respondent(s) : 1 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 21/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. In
the present petition, the petitioners prayed for following
substantive relief:
(B) YOUR
LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the
nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing the
respondent No.1 to proceed further and decide the application being
Mamlatdar Courts Case No. 1 of 2008 pending before him in accordance
with law without being influenced by the order dated 24.7.2008 passed
by learned Principal Civil Judge, Talaja in Regular Civil Suit No.55
of 2008 .
2. The
petitioners have approached Mamlatdar under the Mamlatdar Courts Act
seeking removal of obstruction allegedly put by respondents No. 2
and 3 herein on the passage, which according to the petitioners, they
were using to access
their agricultural land. It appears that present respondents No. 2
and 3 have approached learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Talaja by
filing Regular Civil Suit No.55 of 2008. In the said suit, learned
Judge has passed his order below Exh.5 on 24th July, 2008
after by-parte hearing and has been pleased to partially grant
interim injunction prayed for by the plaintiffs. Consequently, the
petitioners were directed to maintain status-quo with respect to
very same land.
3. The
prayer of the petitioners, as noted, is for issuance of direction
to Mamlatdar to decide their case without being influenced by the
orders passed by the Civil Court.
4. For
obvious reasons, this cannot be done. When the Civil Court has after
by-parte hearing decided Exh.5 application and passed an order
thereon, Mamlatdar cannot be directed to decide the pending
proceedings ignoring such development.
5. Learned
advocate for the petitioners stated that the petitioners are in the
process of filing an appeal against the order passed by the Civil
Court.
6. This
is an entirely different issue and as of now the prayer of the
petitioners cannot be granted.
7. In
the result, this petition fails and hereby dismissed.
(AKIL
KURESHI, J.)
ashish//
Top