Bombay High Court

GOKUL DATTU CHAUDHARI AND OTHERSversusANAGHA PRAVIN GAGDANI AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The trial court's dismissal on technical grounds was improper, and the civil court must decide the merits of the applications and order document production as appropriate.

Summary

In a suit for possession and perpetual injunction, the petitioners filed two applications (Exh.116 and 117) seeking an order directing the defendants to produce certain documents. The trial court held that the applications were incorrectly titled as notices and therefore did not consider them on merit, merely taking them on record. The petitioners challenged this procedural dismissal through a writ petition, arguing that the merits should be decided. The High Court observed that the trial court’s refusal to rule on merit was solely based on a technical defect in the title and not on substantive grounds. Consequently, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the civil court to pass an appropriate order on the merits of the applications within one month, taking into account the law, the defendants’ defenses, and the circumstances.

Issues considered

Whether the trial court erred in refusing to decide the merits of the applications solely on the ground of improper title.
Whether the High Court can direct the civil court to decide the merits of the applications and order production of documents.

Subjects

civil procedure
writ petition
application title defect
document production
possession suit
perpetual injunction

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:38178



                                                                       1-wp.15253.2023


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            901 WRIT PETITION NO. 15253 OF 2023
                              Gokul Dattu Chaudhari And Others
                                           VERSUS
                              Anagha Pravin Gagdani And Others

                                              ----
            Ms.Shreya S. Battise, Advocate h/f. Mr.Vinod P. Patil, Advocate for
            petitioners
            Mr.M.G.Patil, Advocate for respondent nos.1 to 4
                                              ----

                                     CORAM :      AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
                                     DATE  :      AUGUST 20, 2026

            ORDER :-

                       In a suit for possession and perpetual injunction filed by the

            present petitioners/plaintiffs against the respondents/defendants, the

            petitioners/plaintiffs filed two applications vide Exhs.116 and 117

            thereby requesting the court to direct the defendants to produce on

            record list of certain documents as mentioned in the applications. Said

            applications were strongly opposed by the defendants.        On various

            counts the applications were disputed including the title and style of

            the applications as also merit of the applications. The trial court pass

            an order dated 14.08.2023 observing that the applications are titled as

            notices. The trial court observed that the filing could not be termed as

            applications   within the meaning of law and hence the trial court

            merely took on record those applications and did not pass any order on
                                        2                       1-wp.15253



merit.   Feeling aggrieved thereby the petitioners are before this

court. The petition was filed under the impression as if the trial court

has rejected these applications. But the things are not so.

2.           I have seen the text of the impugned order as also the

applications and the response filed by the defendants. Although the

defendants have objected the applications on various counts as

observed above, the trial court court only for the reason that the

applications were not properly titled, has not pass any order on

merit.

3.           Considering this, the present Writ Petition is disposed of

with a request to learned Judge of the Civil Court to pass appropriate

order on merits of the applications Exh.116 and 117 within a period

of one month from today.

4.          Needless to mention, the Civil Court shall take into

consideration the provisions of law, the defence raised by the

defendants in the applications and the circumstances if warrant to

direct the defendants to produce the documents on record as are

prayed by the petitioners/plaintiffs.



                                  [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]
                                ………..
KBP

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…