Suryabhan Motiram Choudhari vs Sonabai W/O Vishwanath Choudhari
2016 Latest Caselaw 2059 Bom

                                                           1                                    judg wp 1346.16.odt 




                                                                                                         
                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
                                        NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.




                                                                               
                                                   Writ Petition No.1346 of 2016.




                                                                              
                       Suryabhan Motiram Choudhari,
                       aged about 68 years, Occ.-retired teacher,
                       R/o.-Shastri Nagar, Mutthe Layout, 
                       near Dr. Bonde's Hospital, Buldhana, 




                                                             
                       Distt-Buldhana.                                                    .... Petitioner.
                                       
                                                                                                Original Defendant

                       Versus
                                      
                       Sonabai w/o Vishwanath Choudhari,
                       aged about 58 years, Occ.-Household,
         


                       R/o.-New Wavare Layout, Near Dr. Bhale's House, 
                       Buldhana, Tq.and Distt. Buldhana.                      .... Respondent.
      



                                                                                           Original Plaintiff

                       Shri S.A. Chaudhari, Adv for petitioner.





                       Shri S.R. Deshpande, Adv for respondent.

                                                        Coram :  S.B. Shukre, J.

th Dated : 29 April, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent.

                       2]        Seen   the   impugned   order   and   also   the   application   filed 




                                                            2                                    judg wp 1346.16.odt 




                                                                                                         

under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The

conclusion drawn by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Junior

Division, Buldana is, that the provisions of Order XXVI Rule 9 of

the Code in view of the law laid down in the case of Sanjay

Namdeo Khandare v Sahebrao Kachru Khandare and others,

reported at 2001(2) Mh.L.J. 959, cannot be pressed into service for

collection of evidence, does not appear to be against the law. The

law is well settled and the application, as seen from its prayer

clause, stands contrary to the settled position of law. Therefore, I

see no illegality nor any perversity in the impugned order.

3] The Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.

                       4]          Rule is discharged.





                                                                                  JUDGE





                        Deshmukh