Case Note & Summary
The case involves a writ petition filed by Group Grampanchayat, Sasavane challenging an order dated 6 January 2010 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Baramati, which allowed an amendment application filed by the respondents (Sunanda Shamrao Bandishti and others) in proceedings for an heirship certificate under Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827. The respondents had applied for an heirship certificate as heirs of late Radhabai Damodar Joshi/Bhatt/Tisgaonkar/Newaskar, who died on 1 January 1990 leaving movable and immovable properties including Gat No.145. The respondents initially joined the State of Maharashtra and the petitioner Grampanchayat as parties to the application. Subsequently, the respondents sought to amend their application, which was allowed by the trial court. The petitioner challenged this amendment order. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner was not a 'person aggrieved' and thus the writ petition was not maintainable. The court examined the facts and found that the petitioner Grampanchayat had no legal right or interest in the properties of the deceased. The amendment sought by the respondents did not affect any right of the Grampanchayat. The court held that the Grampanchayat was not a 'person aggrieved' by the impugned order and therefore lacked locus standi to maintain the writ petition. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Locus Standi - Person Aggrieved - Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827 - The court examined whether a Group Grampanchayat, which was not a claimant to the estate but merely a party joined by the applicants, could challenge an order allowing amendment of the application for heirship certificate. Held that the Grampanchayat had no legal right or interest in the subject matter and was not a 'person aggrieved' by the amendment order, as the amendment did not affect any right of the Grampanchayat. The writ petition was dismissed on the ground of lack of locus standi. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, a Group Grampanchayat, is a 'person aggrieved' and thus has locus standi to maintain a writ petition challenging an order allowing amendment of an application for heirship certificate under Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Locus standi
- Person aggrieved
- Heirship certificate
- Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827
- Amendment of pleadings
- Maintainability of writ petition
