Gujarat High Court
Cheharbhai Mahadevbhai Rabari vs State Of Gujarat on 16 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13730/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13730 of 2025
==========================================================
CHEHARBHAI MAHADEVBHAI RABARI & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.DARSHAN A. DAVE(7921) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
MR CHIRAG A PRAJAPATI(8468) for the Respondent(s) No. 5,6,7,8,9
MR JAY BAROT AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
REFUSED SERVED (N)(10) for the Respondent(s) No. 10
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 16/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The learned counsel Mr. Chirag A. Prajapati appearing for the respondent Nos.5 to 9 has filed an affidavit, which is taken on record.
2. Rule, returnable forthwith. The learned AGP Mr. Jay Barot waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 4, whereas the learned counsel Mr. Chirag A. Parajapti waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent Nos.5 to 9.
3. By consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the present Special Civil Application is taken up for final disposal today. By the present Special Civil Application, the petitioners have challenged the impugned interim order dated 26.09.2025 passed by the respondent No.2 in Mamlatdar Court Act 5(2) / Case - 05/2025 being in violation Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by CHANDRASHEKHAR MEHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC01066) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:13:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/13730/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined of principles of natural justice and that the learned Mamlatdar does not have any power to pass an interim injunction pending the proceedings before him. In the present case, the facts as recorded in the order dated 03.10.2025 passed by this Court are not disputed. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 9 also could not dispute the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners, wherein it has been held that under Section 5(2) of the Mamlatdar Courts Act, the Mamlatdar has no jurisdiction to pass an interim injunction pending the proceedings before him.
4. In view of the settled legal position as enumerated in the judgment of this Court in the case of Jamadar Suleman Bachumiya vs. Mahavir Mathadin, reported in 1962 (0) AIJEL- HC 205382, as well as the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Shri Sandip Bhagvatrao Bhakare vs. Shri Santosh Mohanlal Dave and Ors., dated 30.09.2025 in Writ Petition No. 2713/2021, the impugned interim order dated 26.09.2025 passed by the respondent No.2 in Mamlatdar Court Act 5(2) / Case - 05/2025 is quashed and set aside. The respondent No.2 Mamlatdar is directed to decide and dispose of the Mamlatdar Court Act 5(2) / Case - 05/2025 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.
5. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case and no opinion is expressed thereon.
6. Mamlatdar Court Act 5(2) / Case - 05/2025 shall be decided on its own merits in accordance with law after giving due effective hearing to the parties and thereafter passing a reasoned order dealing with all the contentions so raised by the parties.
Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by CHANDRASHEKHAR MEHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC01066) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:13:27 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/13730/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined
7. The Special Civil Application is accordingly allowed and disposed of.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs.
Direct service is permitted (ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.) cmk Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by CHANDRASHEKHAR MEHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC01066) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:13:27 IST 2025