SAMPAT DAMU KANWADE AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the impugned order passed by the Respondent No.2. By the impugned order, the Respondent No.2 has vacated the order of status-quo passed in the matter though the revision petition is pending for consideration and listed for hearing.

(2.) In brief, it is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that once the order to maintain status-quo was passed by the respondent no.2, there was no reason to vacate the same. Respondent no.2 has acted in most arbitrary manner in passing the impugned order. It is submitted that the respondent no.2 acted in complete disregard to the procedure prescribed under the law in conduct of proceeding. It is submitted that inspite of civil suit seeking injunction in respect of same subject matter is pending before the Civil Court, the respondent no.3 i.e. Mamlatdar has entertained the proceedings U/Sec. 5 of the Mamlatdars Courts Act, which is against the law. The petitioners appeared before the respondent no.3 and pointed out filing of civil proceedings by the plaintiffs as well as the defendants. It is further pointed out that the suit filed by the plaintiffs is pending before the Civil Court against the defendants-respondents. So also the respondents had approached the Civil Court by way of suit seeking prohibitory injunction against the petitioners. It is further pointed out that after withdrawing the suit, the respondents have filed the proceedings under the Mamlatdars Courts Act. It is also pointed out to the Mamlatdar that the proceedings filed by the respondents is not maintainable for want of requisite compliance U/Sec. 7 of the Mamlatdars Courts Act. The petitioners also objected the maintainability of proceedings on the ground of limitation as well as subject matter sub-judice before the Civil Court. However, the respondent - Mamlatdar allowed the application and passed the order without considering the challenge raised by the petitioners. Being aggrieved, the petitioners preferred revision petition U/Sec. 23(2) of the Mamlatdars Courts Act before the respondent no.2. The Revision Petition was presented on 21.07.2020 along with application seeking stay to the order passed by the Mamlatdar. On 21.07.2020, the respondent no.2 passed the order to issue notice to the respondents and further passed the order to maintain status-quo till 28.07.2020. Interim order of status-quo was continued thereafter till 10th August, 2020. Abruptly, the respondent no.2 refused to continue the interim order of status-quo and rejected the application moved by the petitioners to continue the order of status-quo. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have preferred this Petition. It is submitted that the revision petition is pending for consideration of respondent no.2. In the event the order is executed the very purpose of filing of revision petition would be frustrated.

(3.) On due consideration of the submissions advanced in the light of challenge raised in the Petition, I am of the view the Petition raises arguable case to be considered on merit after the notice to respondents. Hence the following order is passed :-