Bombay High Court
Murlidhar Shamrao Ghule vs The Union Of India And Others on 6 May, 2024
1 29
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
29 WRIT PETITION NO. 3946 OF 2022
MURLIDHAR SHAMRAO GHULE
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. C. R. More h/f. Mr. Ingale Vivekanand V.
AGP for Respondent/State: Mr. V. M. Chate
Advocate for Respondents No.1&2 : Ms. Gore Nikita N.
Advocate for Respondents No.20 & 21: Mr. A. N. Nagargoje
...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
DATE : 06th MAY, 2024
PER COURT:
1. Perused the letter dated 08.02.2024 written by the learned
Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bhoom, District: Osmanabad. However,
on perusal of the letter it appears that he has certain doubts as regards
the maintainability of the proceedings before his court. He has not
expressed his doubts by a judicial order but has been administratively
dealing with the matter. Once, there is the direction of this court to
decide the proceedings, the civil judge is bound to decide the case one
way or the other and the court is also entitled to pronounce on the
jurisdiction of the court to decide the proceedings. After pronouncement,
the parties aggrieved may challenge the same. However, the learned Civil
Judge is keeping the matter pending by addressing communication on
administrative side to the Registry of this court.
2. In the instant case, directions were issued by this court, on
05.07.2018 to decide the pending Reference and, from 05.07.2018,
further extensions are granted. Thereafter, against an interim order, Writ
Petition No.3946 of 2022 was filed in this court, which was dismissed by
this court by order dated 09.12.2022, and further directed the Civil Judge
to complete the reference proceedings within three months. Thereafter,
continuous further extensions are sought by the learned Judge.
3. It appears from the letter written by the learned Judge that
he has certain doubts as to whether the matter is maintainable before
him or before the Principal District Judge. The Principal District Judge,
Osmanabad has also verified that the matter is maintainable before him
in view of the circular of the Bombay High Court and also by placing
reliance on Judgments of this court.
4. The learned Judge has thereafter written a letter dated
16.12.2023, on the administrative side to the High Court for transfer of
the case from his court to the District Court. The letter is written on the
administrative side to the Registrar and in view of his letter to the
Registry, the Civil Judge is seeking extension of the time to decide the
Reference proceedings.
5. Mr. A. N. Nagargoje, learned counsel for respondents no. 20
and 21 submits that, on 23.02.2023, the learned Judge has passed an
interim order on Exhibit 196 not permitting the applicants to withdraw
the amount on the ground that there are adverse claims made by various
parties against each other and already the trial has commenced and
reached at the fag end, as such, the learned Judge should decide the
proceedings before it.
6. The learned Civil Judge is thus directed to decide the
Reference in terms of the order dated 05.07.2018, passed by the Division
Bench of this court. In the event, he is of the view that the matter does
not lie before him then he has to pass the judicial order to that effect so
as to enable the parties to take appropriate steps. Extension of six (06)
months, as prayed, is granted from today. No request for further
extension would be considered on the ground of jurisdiction.
7. Registry to intimate this order to the concerned Judge.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.]
marathe
