NARENDRA S. CHAVAN & ORS. versus VAISHALI V. BHADEKAR,

NARENDRA S. CHAVAN & ORS. versus VAISHALI V. BHADEKAR,

The Division Bench had no jurisdiction to entertain a Letters Patent Appeal against the order rejecting restoration application as it was not a judgment, and even if maintainable, the Division Bench could not decide the merits but only remit the matter to Single Judge for decision.

Parties
Appellants Landlord: Narendra S. Chavan & Ors.; Respondent Tenant: Vaishali V. Bhadekar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal Against Division Bench Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned judgment and order of Division Bench set aside.
Legal Topics
Letters Patent Appeal, Jurisdiction, Practice and Procedure
Civil Procedure Rent Control Letters Patent Appeal Jurisdiction Practice and Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Narendra S. Chavan & Ors.

Appellants Landlord

Vaishali V. Bhadekar

Respondent Tenant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal Against Division Bench Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Letters Patent Appeal is maintainable against an order rejecting restoration application by a Single Judge that is not a judgment
  2. 2 Whether Division Bench had jurisdiction to decide merits of the matter in a Letters Patent Appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The Division Bench had no jurisdiction to entertain a Letters Patent Appeal against the order rejecting restoration application as it was not a judgment, and even if maintainable, the Division Bench could not decide the merits but only remit the matter to Single Judge for decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned judgment and order of Division Bench set aside.

Orders

  • Judgment and order of Division Bench of Bombay High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 249 of 2002 set aside.
  • No order as to costs.