Sau. Kalawatibai Kanhyalalji ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. The ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6916 Bom

                                                                                             (1)                                                 912wp4295.23

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

                                            WRIT PETITION NO. 4295                                             OF 2023
     Kalawatibai Kanhyalalji Kalwani and anr__ Vs. __State of Maharashtra and ors
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,                                                                     Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Mr. P.A.Dharaskar, Advocate for petitioner
           Mrs. M.A.Barabde, AGP for respondent nos.1 & 2


                                                                           CORAM :                     AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

                                                                           DATE  :                     12/07/2023


                                               1]                           It is contended that it is an admitted

position that to the West of plot no. 2617 is the land of the petitioners, namely plot No. 2618. The RCS No. 298/17 claims a declaration that an area demarcated by the letters AGC-3F in the plaint map (pg.63) be declared as the exclusive way of the plaintiff to approach his house and the courtyard. By way of an order below Exh.5 dated 11.01.2018 (pg.76) the defendants therein have been restrained from removing the gate at point AG as per the plaint map till the decision of the suit.

2] The petitioners have been added subsequently as defendant nos. 4 and 5 on the ground that they are the owners of the immediate adjacent property. An application under Order 39 Rule 4 of the CPC has been rejected by the Trial

(2) 912wp4295.23

Court by the order dated 16.04.2019 (pg.52) which has been confirmed by the Appellate Court by the judgment dated 10.01.2023 (pg.42). It is contended that the lane which is shown by letters AGC-3F, is a common lane and the plaintiff does not have any exclusive right to the same, in light of which the order below Exh. 5 ought to have been modified.

3] Issue notice for final disposal returnable in four weeks.

4] Learned AGP waives service of notice for respondent nos.1 and 2.

5] Petitioner shall serve the other respondents by all modes permissible in law including Hamdast.

6] The request for stay of the proceedings is declined.

JUDGE Rvjalit