Jurisdiction of the court being questioned is a plea being taken in revision for the first time. It does not appear that such objection had been taken while the suit had been defended. No issue on that ground had been framed. Nor does it appear that this contention had ever been urged before the appellate court. It is not a case wherein it can be said that the court which had dealt with the proceedings, had no jurisdiction to try suits pursuant to section 33 of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 or Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code or for that matter section 5 of the Specific Relief Act.
39. So far as jurisdiction of court is concerned, it appears that the situation is no longer res integra and appears to be amply covered by the Supreme Court judgment in the case of "Babulal Bhuramal" (supra) relied upon on behalf of the respondent.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)
Civil Revision Application No. 113 of 2016
Decided On: 23.03.2017
Shila Ramchandra Sachdeva Vs. Vinod Harchamal Santani
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S.P. Deshmukh, J.
Citation: 2017(6) MHLJ 396.
Read full judgment:Click here
No comments:
Post a Comment