Mohd Afroz S/O Mohad Rafiq vs Ayesha Kausar W/O Mohd Afroz

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 6106 Bom
Judgement Date : 17 October, 2016

Bombay High Court
Mohd Afroz S/O Mohad Rafiq vs Ayesha Kausar W/O Mohd Afroz on 17 October, 2016
Bench: S.P. Deshmukh
                                                                       M.C.A.92/2016
                                        1

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                             BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 92 OF 2016




                                                                           
    Mohd. Afroz s/o Mohd. Rafiq
    Age 30 years, Occu. Nil,




                                                   
    R/o H-5-22-54, New Gulmandi
    road, Aurangabad
    District Aurangabad                            .. Applicant

            Versus




                                                  
    Ayesha Kausar w/o Mohd. Afroz,
    Age 21 years, Occu. Household,
    R/o H.No. 1-13-66, Shahabazar,
    Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad                   .. Respondent




                                     
    Mr S.B. Choudhari, Advocate for applicant
    Mr Farooqui K.N. Advocate for respondent
                             
                                    CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.
                                    DATE       : 17th October, 2016


    ORAL JUDGMENT
      
   



    1.      Rule. Rule returnable forthwith.


2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant urges that the matter may be listed before another Presiding Officer, as grudge may be entertained against him by the Presiding Officer before whom the proceedings are pending.

4. It appears to be the case of the applicant that on the scheduled date 7th December 2015, he was not in a position to attend the court on account of illness and had attempted to seek time by tendering an application through his friend. He claimed to have not received ::: Uploaded on - 18/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2016 00:45:30 ::: M.C.A.92/2016 2 proper treatment at the hands of the Presiding Officer and as such, an application had been moved to the Honourable the Chief Justice making complaint about incident, however, subsequently, it appears that the applicant has engaged professional service of an advocate and accordingly, matter is being posted before the learned Presiding Officer.

5. Though learned counsel apprehends grudge being entertained by the Presiding Officer, it may be considered that now the applicant has engaged professional services and the matter is to be dealt with on facts, evidence and in accordance with law. The solitary incident in this matter would not be given such significance which would overwhelm the outcome in the matter on facts, evidence and law. In such circumstances, it does not appear to be a case wherein miscellaneous civil application can be considered.

6. Miscellaneous civil application, as such, stands rejected with above observations. Rule stands discharged.

SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JUDGE vvr ::: Uploaded on - 18/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2016 00:45:30 :::