M/S Renuka Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India Through Textile Commissioner And ANR

8.wp.7867.2015.doc dik

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7867 OF 2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (L) NO. 22640 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7867 OF 2015 Union of India

...Petitioner

vs M/s Renuka Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

...Respondents

.....

Mr G.R.Sharma a/w D.P.Singh for the Petitioner Mr Abhineet Pange i/b Ashish Agarwal for Respondent No.2. .....

CORAM : N. M. JAMDAR, J.

17 OCTOBER, 2016 P.C. :

The grievance made by the Petitioner is that certain issues have been incorrectly framed by the learned City Civil Court Judge and those issues which are framed do not give rise to any contest as the position envisaged in these issues is admitted. Learned advocate for the Respondent controverts this position. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has not provided any appeal or revision against the order such as the impugned order. The scope of interference under Article 227 is extremely limited. If the issues are superfluous as contended by the Petitioner, the learned City Pg 1 of 2

8.wp.7867.2015.doc Civil Court Judge will no doubt take note of the arguments of the Petitioner and the Respondents at the time of hearing of the suit and pass appropriate orders. Merely because the issues are so framed does not mean that the Petitioner is precluded from arguing all contentions which are available in law and facts. In the circumstances, since no prejudice is caused to the parties, as all contentions are open at the time of trial, no interference in the impugned order is warranted. At least, Union of India should have refrained from adding to the burden of this Court by not filing such Writ Petitions. The Writ Petition is rejected. In view of disposal of Writ Petition, nothing survives in the Civil Application and the same is disposed of accordingly. ( N.M.JAMDAR J. ) Pg 2 of 2