SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Bom) 1126

High Court of Judicature at Bombay
R.M. BORDE
M/s. Metafield Coil Pvt.Ltd.
Versus
M/s. Nikivik Tube Industries Pvt.Ltd.
WRIT PETITION NO. 2665 OF 2011
Decided on : 22-09-2011

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:R.M. Bhandari, Advocate.
For the Respondent:V.G. Ghosalkar, Advocate.

Headnote:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XVIII, Rule1 - Powers of trial Court - Trial Court not invested with powers under Order XVIII, Rule 1 of Code to direct defendant to begin with trial by leading evidence on their part.

       Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XVIII, Rule1 - Right to begin - If defendant himself is not claiming right to begin first, Court, cannot direct defendant to lead his evidence first.

Judgment :

Heard.

Rule.

With consent of parties, petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.

2. The short point that arises for consideration is whether the trial Court is invested with the powers under order 18 rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (C.P.C.) to direct the defendant to begin with the trial by leading evidence on their part.

3. The petitioner/ original defendant is raising exception to the order passed below Exh.77 in Special Civil Suit No.204/2001 decided on 17th August 2009 whereby, the trial Court allowed the application tendered by the plaintiff seeking direction against the defendant to begin with the trial by leading evidence on their part. In Special Civil Suit No.204/2001 instituted by the plaintiff, the following prayers are made:

a) It be declared that the Defendants have encroached upon the suit land as shown on the sketch annexed to the Plaint on Gut No.211.

b) It be further declared that the work of construction carried out on Gut No.211 and as shown on the sketch annexed to the plaint is absolutely illegal and the Defendants are not entitled to continue with the same.

c) The Defendants, their servants, agents, or any one claiming through them, be restrained by an order of injunction, from in any manner, in the area as shown in the sketch and marked by letters “A”, “B”, “C”, “D” and “E” and/or carry out any construction thereon.

d) The Defendants, their servants, agents, etc. may be ordered and decreed to remove themselves and the structures constructed on the Suit Lands within the area as shown in the sketch and marked by letters “A”, “B”, “C”, “D” and “E”;

e) Adinterim injunction in terms of prayers “c” and “d” above be granted in favour of the Plaintiffs, till the final disposal of the suit;

f) Adinterim, exparte relief in terms of prayer “c” and “d” and “e” above be granted in favour of the Plaintiffs;

g) Costs of the suit be provided for;

h) E.P. /S.B. be allowed.

i) Any other and further relief/s as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the suit, may kindly be granted in favour of the Plaintiffs.

4. The defendant has resisted suit by filing written statement/cross-objections and has claimed to have entered into an agreement to purchase the property in dispute from the plaintiff. The defendant has denied to have committed any encroachment over the property as alleged by the plaintiff. The defendant also seeks a decree of specific performance of agreement entered into by the defendant-company with the plaintiff. The following prayers are made in the cross-objections tendered by the defendant:

a. It be declared and decreed that, the Defendants are the lawful owners of the Suit Land, which has been sold and handed over to them by the Plaintiffs for a valuable consideration and has been in their lawful possession;

b. The Plaintiffs be ordered and decreed to execute the Sale Deed in respect of the Suit land on favour of the Defendants and register the same with the Sub-Registrar of Assurances;

c. The Plaintiffs, their agents, servants, representatives, etc. be restrained by an Order of permanent injunction from disturbing the possession of the Defendants over the Suit Land in any manner whatsoever and be further restrained from entering upon the property of the Defendants and/or obstructing the functioning of their factory;

d. Interim injunction in terms of prayer `c’ above be granted in favour of the Defendants;

e. Cost of the Counter-Claim be provided for;

f. Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case, may kindly be granted in favour of the Defendants.

5. The plaintiff tendered an application at Exh.77 contending therein that the suit presented by the plaintiff is for seeking declaration that the defendant-company has encroached upon 22 Gunthas of land out of Gut No.211. The defendant-company, however, in the written statement/ counter claim presented by the










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top