Mr. Ravikant Harbanslal Sakuja v. Mrs. Seema Rajiv Anand And ORS

wp.5270.19.9.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5270 OF 2019 Ravikant Harbanslal Sakuja

...Petitioner

Versus

Seema Rajiv Anand & Ors.

...Respondents

Mr. Sandeep Mahadik for the Petitioner Mr. Shivajirao Satpute i/b Satpute & Co. for the Respondent No.1 CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

MONDAY, 24 th FEBRUARY 2020 P.C. :

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By this petition, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 8th October 2018 passed by the learned 8th Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pune, below Exhibit 68 in Special Civil Suit No. 399/2017, by which, the learned Judge was pleased to reject the petitioner's application seeking withdrawal of the pursis dated 2nd December 2016 filed by him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that having regard to the peculiar facts, the learned Judge should have allowed the application and permitted the petitioner to withdraw his pursis. SQ Pathan 1/2

wp.5270.19.9.doc Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the petition. He submits that no interference is warranted in the impugned order, inasmuch as, learned Judge has observed that, "such pursis by no stretch of imagination is yet acted upon either in favour or either against either of the parties to the proceeding. In such circumstances, it hardly matters whether such pursis is withdrawn or not withdrawn." Perused the papers. The learned Judge has rightly observed that the withdrawal of the pursis would make no difference, inasmuch as, the same has not been acted upon and since the petitioner has disclosed his intention of contesting the Suit on merits.

Considering what is stated aforesaid, no infirmity is found in the impugned order. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Learned Judge to decide the Suit on its own merits in accordance with law. All contentions of the parties in the Suit are kept open.

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

SQ Pathan 2/2