Chanbasappa Karbasappa ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 747 Bom

                                                                              954_WP243417.odt


         
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                         WRIT PETITION NO. 2434 OF 2017

Chanbasappa Karbasappa Chinchole
Age: 62 years, Occu.: Agri.,
R/o Near Shivaji College,
Main Road, Omerga, Tq. Omerga,
Dist. Osmanabad.                                                    ..PETITIONER

               VERSUS

1.  State of Maharashtra
     Through Collector, Osmanabad.

2.  Tahsildar
     Tahsildar Office, Omerga
     Dist. Osmanabad.                                                ..RESPONDENTS

                                     ....
Mr. P.V. Barde, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. S.R. Yadav - Lonikar, A.G.P. for respondents.
                                     ....

                                                       CORAM :  S.B. SHUKRE, J.

DATED : 15th MARCH, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. Issue notice for final disposal to the respondents. Learned

A.G.P. waives service of notice for respondents.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of both the parties.

1 / 3

954_WP243417.odt

3. Considering the fact that the original file of the Collector Office

was before the Trial Court during pendency of the suit and the same was

sent back after disposal of the suit, which is evident from the judgment

and order dated 28th July, 2003 passed in Special Civil Suit No. 83 of

1994, I do no think that any inconvenience would have been caused to

any of the parties in keeping the original file in Collector Office, on record

of first Appellate Court.

4. By order dated 09th December, 2016 passed by the learned

District Judge which is impugned herein, it is held that original record and

proceedings are not necessary for deciding the appeal. But, when they

were very much there during pendency of the suit, and they are also

considered by the Trial Court, and appeal being continuation of the

original proceeding, the parties would be better assisted if original record

and proceedings are made available for their perusal. In view of this, I

find that the impugned order is arbitrary and deserves to be quashed and

set aside.

5. Writ Petition is allowed. Impugned order is quashed and set

aside. Application at Exhibit 18 is allowed. The record and proceedings

be called from the Collector Office within six weeks from the date of the

2 / 3

954_WP243417.odt

order and kept alongwith the paper book of the Regular Civil Appeal No.

47 of 2015. Rule made absolute in those terms. No costs.

( S.B. SHUKRE, J. ) SSD

3 / 3