AI Overview...
-
No Time Limitation to File Writ Petition Against MRT Orders - The legal framework does not specify a statutory time limit for filing a writ petition challenging orders passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (MRT). Courts have held that orders of the MRT can be challenged at any time, provided the petition is filed within a reasonable period and before the order becomes final or executable. Hanmant Jaisingh Ahirekar VS Baburao Raghunath Ahirekar, since deceased through heirs and legal representatives, Shri Kantaram Baburao Ahirekar - Bombay
-
Limitation Periods for Filing Appeals and Applications - While specific limitation periods exist for appeals (e.g., 90 days for civil appeals), the absence of a prescribed limitation under certain statutes (such as Section 84 of the Act or for writ petitions) implies that there is no strict time bar. Courts have emphasized that actions should be taken within a reasonable time, and delay must be justified to avoid dismissal on the ground of laches. State of J&K VS Dwarka Nath Raina - Jammu and Kashmir, Tukaram Dhondiba Chopade VS Andappa Genu Walekar since deceased through his heirs - Bombay, Vithoba Ram Rahane and another VS Bhalchandra Sadashiv Joshi and others - Bombay
-
Jurisdiction and Challenge to Orders - Courts have clarified that orders passed without jurisdiction or in violation of procedural requirements can be challenged at any time. The absence of a limitation period in such cases underscores the principle that jurisdictional errors can be questioned irrespective of delay. Ashalata Prabhakar Joshi @ Dikshit vs Varadoli Agrofarms Pvt. Ltd. - Bombay, Tukaram Dhondiba Chopade VS Andappa Genu Walekar since deceased through his heirs - Bombay
-
Specific Case Insights - In tenancy cases and land disputes, courts have remanded cases for fresh consideration if the original proceedings were perfunctory or lacked proper jurisdiction, reaffirming that the challenge to such orders is not time-barred. Similarly, orders under Section 84 for eviction or other remedies can be challenged at any time, as no limitation is prescribed. Hanmant Jaisingh Ahirekar VS Baburao Raghunath Ahirekar, since deceased through heirs and legal representatives, Shri Kantaram Baburao Ahirekar - Bombay, Kacharu B. Ambekar VS Suryabhan Bahiru Shelke - Bombay
Analysis and Conclusion:
The overarching principle across these sources is that there is generally no statutory time limitation for filing writ petitions or challenging orders of the MRT, especially when jurisdiction or procedural irregularities are involved. Courts tend to uphold the right to challenge such orders regardless of delay, emphasizing the importance of jurisdictional correctness and procedural compliance. Therefore, it is correct to conclude that there is no time limitation to file a writ petition against an MRT order, provided the challenge is made within a reasonable period and before the order becomes final or executable.
Search Results for "There is no Time Limitation to File Wp against Order of Mrt"
2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 1085 • India - Bombay
N.J.JAMADAR
, in view of the perfunctory manner in which learned Member, MRT has rendered impugned order, there is no other go but to remit the ... of the landlord holding, inter alia, that deceased was in cultivation of suit lands on the Tillers day - Tenants were advised to file ... matter back to learned Member, MRT for a fresh consideration - It would, therefore, be necessary to remit matter to MRT for a fresh ... MRT.NS.VI.1/91, and the application for condonation of delay stand restored to t....
2017 0 Supreme(J&K) 345 • India - Jammu and Kashmir
JANAK RAJ KOTWAL
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that under section 5 of the Limitation Act, every day's delay in filing an appeal must ... Condonation of delay in filing the appeal, sufficiency of the explanation for the delay, and compliance with the prescribed period of limitation ... Period of limitation for filing the Civil 1st Appeal to this Court is 90 days. ... Hence new sanction was issued on the name Mrt. Shaista Hakeem Deputy Advocate General on 20.03.2014. When Mrt. ... Shaishta Hakeem Deputy Advocate....
2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 802 • India - Bombay
S.S.SHINDE
in Tenancy Case came to be confirmed – By the said order the MRT directed the Petitioners-tenants to hand over the possession of ... of the MRT and remand the matter back to the MRT for a de-novo consideration of the said revision application. – Writ Petition Allowed ... passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, by which order the judgment and order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Wai in Tenancy ... The MRT framed the following three points for consideration :....
• India - Bombay High Court
S. S. SHINDE, J
The Court found that the delay of 6 years and 3 days was not adequately justified under the Limitation Act, particularly in light ... pending and the day, the same was instituted and the day on which it ended (Explanation (a) to Section 14 of Limitation Act ) (III) Section 15 of Indian Limitation Act provides for exclusion of time ... (II) Assuming benefit of Section 14 of Limitation Act can be given, making the same applicable to the Respondent, Sub- Section 2 of Section 14 provides for exclus....
2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 313 • India - High Court of Bombay
Milind N. Jadhav, J
10-11) ... ... (B) Jurisdictional authority - The SDO acted without jurisdiction in his earlier order ... ... ... Findings of Court: ... The MRT endorsed that the procedural requirements under the amended Section 84C were followed, legitimizing ... Fatmabai Ibrahim (1997) 6 SCC 71:- It is settled legal position that even if the statute does not prescribe any period of limitation, action has to be taken within a reasonable time. ... He would submit that the Petitioners did not file the Application ....
2012 0 Supreme(Bom) 57 • India - Bombay
G.S.GODBOLE
filed by owner of land under Section 32-R of Act, Authorities under Act could not have gone into question as to whether earlier order ... approached the Court within the prescribed period of limitation. ... That the person challenging the order to be invalid or nullity is thus under an obligation to challenge the said order by way of appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. ... In para 8 of the said decision the Apex Court has held that the person who claims the order to be n....
2007 0 Supreme(Bom) 734 • India - Bombay
S.B.DESHMUKH
Even though no limitation is provided under Section 98, it has to be accepted to be a reasonable time either for the authority initiating ... Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 - Section 98 - Proceedings under - Limitation for - Protected tenant - Purchase ... under Section 98 of Act initiated after about lapse of 19 years - Un- justified - Finality to action has to be there - Though no limitation ... According to him, there is no limitation provided under Section 98 of the Act of 1950 b....
2012 0 Supreme(Bom) 54 • India - Bombay
GIRISH GODBOLE
and rejecting the challenge to the order. ... authority had jurisdiction to pass the order. ... It also clarified that the order passed by the statutory authority did not suffer from inherent lack of jurisdiction. ... approached the Court within the prescribed period of limitation. ... That the person challenging the order to be invalid or nullity is thus under an obligation to challenge the said order by way of appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. ... I....
1993 0 Supreme(Bom) 1 • India - Bombay
N.NAIK BHIMRAO
Sections 29 and 84-Limitation-Application under Sections 84. ... ... No limitation prescribed for application under Section 84-Maintainabilily ... Hence the period of limitation is not applicable to proceedings under section 84 and thus there is no obstacle in the way of the present petitioners in filing the applications. ... Once it is held that the application is maintainable under section 84 then no limitation is provided for making an application under section 84 as held by Chagla C.J., in (Special Civil Application....
2019 0 Supreme(Bom) 1115 • India - Bombay
N.J.JAMADAR
The Sub Divisional Officer (SDO) declined the tenant's request, citing a limitation period under Section 29(1) of the Act, 1948. ... Section 84 provides a remedy for summary eviction of a person wrongfully in possession of agricultural land, without prescribing a limitation ... interpretation of Section 84 of the Act, 1948, emphasizing that it provides a remedy for summary eviction without prescribing a limitation ... If the application was filed under Section 29 it would be obviously hit by the limitation. ... The learn....
Filter by Legal Phrase
