Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, owners of Gat Nos. 40/8 and 40/9, challenged the orders of the Tahsildar and Sub Divisional Officer directing them to remove obstructions in the way through their fields to Gat No. 40/10 owned by the respondent. The respondent had filed an application under Section 5 of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 before the Tahsildar, claiming that the petitioners had obstructed the way. The Tahsildar allowed the application and directed removal of obstructions. The petitioners challenged this order before the Sub Divisional Officer, who confirmed it. The petitioners then filed a writ petition in the High Court, contending that the Mamlatdar's Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the application as a civil suit for declaration of right of way was pending. The High Court held that the jurisdiction of the Mamlatdar's Court under Section 5 of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 is summary in nature and is not barred by the pendency of a civil suit. The Mamlatdar's Court can decide the question of possession and obstruction based on revenue records. The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the orders of the Tahsildar and Sub Divisional Officer.
Headnote
A) Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 - Section 5 - Jurisdiction - Summary Proceeding - Pendency of Civil Suit - The jurisdiction of the Mamlatdar's Court under Section 5 of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 is summary in nature and is not barred by the pendency of a civil suit for declaration of right of way. The Mamlatdar's Court can decide the question of possession and obstruction based on revenue records and pass appropriate orders for removal of obstruction. The civil suit for declaration does not oust the jurisdiction of the Mamlatdar's Court. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the pendency of a civil suit for declaration of right of way bars the jurisdiction of the Mamlatdar's Court under Section 5 of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 to pass an order for removal of obstruction in the way.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the orders of the Tahsildar and Sub Divisional Officer directing removal of obstructions.
Law Points
- Jurisdiction of Mamlatdar's Court under Section 5 of Mamlatdars' Courts Act
- 1906 is summary in nature and not barred by pendency of civil suit for declaration of right of way
- Mamlatdar's Court can decide question of possession and obstruction based on revenue records
- Civil suit for declaration does not oust jurisdiction of Mamlatdar's Court
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (07) 14
Writ Petition No. 4027 of 2009
Shri. S.P. Chapalgaonkar for petitioners, Shri. P.B. Shirsat for respondent
Vishwanath s/o. Rambhaji Bhalerao and Changdeo s/o. Tukaram Bhalerao
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging orders of Tahsildar and Sub Divisional Officer under Section 5 of Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 directing removal of obstructions in agricultural way.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of orders dated 17.12.2008 and 9.3.2009 passed by Tahsildar and Sub Divisional Officer respectively.
Filing Reason
Petitioners contended that Mamlatdar's Court had no jurisdiction due to pendency of civil suit for declaration of right of way.
Previous Decisions
Tahsildar, Kopargaon allowed application under Section 5 of Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 on 17.12.2008 directing removal of obstructions. Sub Divisional Officer, Sangamner confirmed the order on 9.3.2009 in Revision Application No. 77/2008.
Issues
Whether the pendency of a civil suit for declaration of right of way bars the jurisdiction of the Mamlatdar's Court under Section 5 of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 to pass an order for removal of obstruction in the way.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the Mamlatdar's Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the application as a civil suit for declaration of right of way was pending.
Respondent argued that the jurisdiction of the Mamlatdar's Court under Section 5 of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 is summary and not barred by the pendency of a civil suit.
Ratio Decidendi
The jurisdiction of the Mamlatdar's Court under Section 5 of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 is summary in nature and is not barred by the pendency of a civil suit for declaration of right of way. The Mamlatdar's Court can decide the question of possession and obstruction based on revenue records.
Judgment Excerpts
The jurisdiction of the Mamlatdar's Court under Section 5 of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 is summary in nature and is not barred by the pendency of a civil suit for declaration of right of way.
Procedural History
Respondent filed application under Section 5 of Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906 on 25.4.2008 before Tahsildar, Kopargaon. Tahsildar allowed application on 17.12.2008. Petitioners filed revision before Sub Divisional Officer, Sangamner, which was dismissed on 9.3.2009. Petitioners then filed writ petition in High Court on 1.7.2009.
Acts & Sections
- Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906: Section 5
