Sunder Ghumanmal Golani v. Dhiraj Vallabhdas Sanghavi
2025:BHC-AS:45021 Diksha Rane 16 & 17 MCA 2842025 & anr.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.284/2025 SUNDER GHUMANMAL GOLANI ..APPLICANT VS DHIRAJ VALLABHDAS SANGHAVI ..RESPONDENT WITH MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 310/2025 MR. RANJITSINGH LINGA ..APPLICANT VS PARWAN CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD ..RESPONDENT ------------ Ms. Sunaina Chakravartty i/b. Mr. Jitesh R. Agarwal for applicants. Mr. Sameer Bhalekar for respondent nos.1 and 4. ------------ CORAM :
RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE :
14 OCTOBER 2025.
P.C. :
1.
These two applications are filed by the applicants under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
2.
For the sake of convenience, the facts of Misc. Civil Application No.284 of 2024 are taken into consideration.
3.
The applicant who is plaintiff in Suit No.2576/2024 pending before the City Civil Court at Bombay seeks transferred of the suit back to the High Court at Bombay.
Diksha Rane 16 & 17 MCA 2842025 & anr.doc 4.
Only ground on which the transfer is sought is that by an order dated 1 March 2018, passed in eleven transferred petitions, this Court had transferred back eleven suits to be heard by this Court along with the suit which was then numbered as Suit No.4559 of 1995, as well as with Writ Petition No. 8329 of 2011 pending below this Court. Subsequently, by an order dated 4 April 2018, passed in Misc. Civil Application St. No.22521 of 2017, a Single Judge of this Court refused to transfer the City Civil Court Suit No.3063 of 2016 on the ground that though eleven suits were transferred to this Court but Suit No.3063 of 2016 is valued before Rs.1 crore and the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court at that time was Rs.1 crore.
The said order passed by this Court dated 4 April 2018 was challenged before the Supreme Court by way of a SLP (c) No.23616/2018 (Civil Appeal No.752/2020). The Supreme Court by its order set aside the order dated 4 April 2018 passed by the Single Judge of this Court and directed that Suit No.3063/2016, be heard along with eleven suits by this Court. Earlier, a Single Judge of this Court while hearing Writ Petition No.8329/2011, which challenged the judgment and order dated 27 September 2011 passed by the Minister for Co-operation, Maharashtra State by which the Revision Application No.
Diksha Rane 16 & 17 MCA 2842025 & anr.doc directed to be registered. While granting Rule, this Court (on 12 January 2012) directed that in the fitness of things, the hearing of the Writ Petition will await the decision of the suit after they are transferred. Paragraph Nos.8 and 9 of the said order read as under:- In view of the fact that the controversy involved in the 12 Suits which are mentioned on page 14 of the Petition and the Suit No. 4559 of 1995 filed by Mr. Sunder G. Golani is in respect of the same property and in view of the fact that common questions of law and fact will arise, with a view to avoid contradictory orders, it is necessary that this Whit Petition is heard alongwith the Sult No. 4559 of 1995 and the 12 suits mentioned on the page 14 of the Petition.
All these suits are pending on the original side and hence, in the fitness of things, this Petition should be heard alongwith the said suits so that they can be considered by the learned single Judge, hearing the sults as and when the suits are taken up for hearing. In the event the suits are transferred to the City Civil Court, on account of implementation of the enactment regarding enhancement of jurisdiction it is obvious that this writ Petition cannot be transferred to the City Civil Court. In such situation, it would be in the fitness of things that the hearing of this Petition awaits the decision of the suits after they are transferred.
5.
The claim in all these suits is below Rs.10 crores as of date, therefore, it is only the City Civil Court at Bombay would have jurisdiction to try and entertain these suits. 6.
By Notification dated 28 January 2024, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court at Bombay has been enhanced to Rs.10 crores, hence out of these thirteen suits, seven suits have already been transferred by the Registry of this Court to the City Civil Court at Bombay. Therefore, according to me, these suits have been rightly transferred to the City Civil Court at Bombay. Hence, I find no
Diksha Rane 16 & 17 MCA 2842025 & anr.doc merits in the present applications and the same stand rejected. 7.
Since the original suits are filed in the year 1995 before this Court and now being transferred to the City Civil Court, they are renumbered as suits filed in the year 2024, hence all the suits need to be clubbed together and heard expeditiously, treating them as suits filed in the year 1995.
8.
B.C.C.C. Suit No. 2576 of 2024 to be tagged together and heard along with B.C.C.C. Suit No.1032 of 2024, expeditiously. 9.
The Misc. Civil Applications are dismissed.
(Rajesh S. Patil, J.) Signed by: Diksha Rane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 15/10/2025 18:47:48