Bombay High Court

PANNALAL KULLUPRASAD NIRMALversusRAJKUMARI RAMPYARE NIRMAL

Decided: 7 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court held that the revision application was not maintainable and may be withdrawn, with the execution petition deferred for two weeks but no stay granted.

Summary

The applicant, Pannalal Kulluprasad Nirmal, filed a regular appeal under Order 41 of the CPC but, believing the order arose from a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, withdrew that appeal and filed a civil revision under Section 115 CPC. The applicant sought permission to withdraw the revision and to pursue appropriate proceedings before the District Court, while also requesting a short stay of an execution petition scheduled for 10 September 2026. The respondent argued that the applicant was a trespasser with no right to occupy the property and therefore not entitled to equitable relief. The High Court held that the revision was not maintainable, allowed the applicant to withdraw it, and ordered a two‑week deferment of the execution petition without granting any further stay. Consequently, the revision application was disposed of as withdrawn, and the applicant was directed to pursue his remedy before the District Court, Thane.

Issues considered

Whether the civil revision under Section 115 of the CPC is maintainable in the circumstances described.
Whether the applicant may withdraw the revision application and pursue relief before the District Court.
Whether the execution petition should be stayed pending the applicant's further proceedings.

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 115, Order 41
Specific Relief Act, 1963 — s. 6

Subjects

civil revision
Section 115 CPC
withdrawal of appeal
execution petition
Specific Relief Act
equitable relief
trespass

Judgment

2026:BHC-AS:36690

                                                                            8 cra 485 of 2026.doc

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                           CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.485 OF 2026

            Pannalal Kulluprasad Nirmal                          ...   Applicant
                 versus
            Rajkumari Rampyare Nirmal and Ors.                   …     Respondents

            Mr. A.M.Kulkarni i/by Mr. Sachin K. Hande, for Applicant.
            Mr. B.K.Bali with Ms. Veena Nair i/by Bali Associates, for Respondent No.1.

                                CORAM:      N.J.JAMADAR, J.

                                DATE :      7 SEPTEMBER 2026

            P.C.

            1.      Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

            2.      Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the impugned judgment

            and order is not amenable to revision under the provisions of Section 115 of

            the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.      In fact, the Applicant had filed a regular

            appeal under the provisions of Order 41 of the Code, 1908 before the District

            Court. However, under misconception of facts that the impugned order came

            to be passed in a suit instituted under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act,

            1963, the Applicant had withdrawn the said appeal and preferred this revision

            application. The appropriate remedy for the Applicant – Defendant is to file a

            proceeding before the District Court.

            3.      The learned Counsel for the Applicant, thus, seeks leave to withdraw

            the Civil Revision Application with liberty to take out appropriate proceeding



            SSP                                                                    1/3
                                                                 8 cra 485 of 2026.doc

before the District Court. In the meanwhile, since the Execution Petition is

scheduled to be listed on 10 September 2026, learned Counsel submits that

the applicant be protected for a limited period.

4.    Learned Counsel for the Respondent resisted the submissions on

behalf of the Applicant. It was urged that, the Applicant is a trespasser and

has no right to occupy the subject property.           The Applicant has been

unauthorizedly occupying the subject property since the year 2009. Therefore,

the Applicant does not deserve any equitable relief.

5.    The order passed by the learned District Judge dated 10 January 2025

indicates that the Applicant was permitted to withdraw Civil Misc. Application

No.138 of 2023 with liberty to file appropriate proceeding before the

appropriate Court.    In effect, the Applicant has not had the hearing on the

legality, propriety and correctness of the judgment and decree passed by the

trial Court in RCS No.172 of 2008 dated 31 August 2023.

6.    In these circumstances, as the Applicant intends to withdraw the

revision application and pursue the remedies as available in law before the

District Court, Thane, this Court considers it expedient in the interest of justice

to permit the Applicant to withdraw the Civil Revision Application and take out

appropriate proceeding before the District Court, Thane.

7.    To facilitate the Applicant to take out an appropriate proceeding before

the District Court, Thane, the executing Court is requested to defer the


SSP                                                                   2/3
                                                                                       8 cra 485 of 2026.doc

                      hearing of the execution petition for a period of two weeks from 10 September

                      2026.

                      8.       It is hereby made clear that, request for extension of time shall neither

                      be entertained by this Court, nor the Applicant shall be entitled to make any

                      application for stay to the execution proceeding before the executing Court.

                      The Applicant would be required to work out his remedies before the District

                      Court only.

                      9.       Subject to the aforesaid liberty and clarification, the Civil Revision

                      Application stands disposed as withdrawn.




                                                                          ( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )




                      SSP                                                                   3/3



Signed by: S.S.Phadke
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 07/09/2026 19:10:04

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…