Manubhai Kohyabhai Talpada & vs Minteshbhai Dineshbhai Desai &

Heard Mr.Zubin F. Bharda, learned advocate for the petitioners. He has submitted that the dispute between the parties is regarding the suit property which is claimed by the petitioners as tenants. The litigation in this regard is pending before the Revenue Courts and, at present, the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal is seized of the Revision Application preferred by the petitioners, in which an order directing the parties to maintain status­quo has been passed, and is in operation. However, the petitioners have approached the Civil Court by filing a suit, inter­alia, praying that the possession of the petitioners over the suit property may not be Page 1 of 3 C/SCA/14758/2013 ORDER interfered with, by the respondents. That, by way of application at Exhibit­5, the petitioners have prayed for the grant of a temporary injunction. It is further submitted that the Trial Court, while deciding the application at Exhibit­5, has passed an order to the effect that both parties shall maintain status­quo in respect of the suit property, till the pendency of the suit. However, this order has been set aside by the Appellate Court by way of the impugned order, on the ground that the dispute is regarding tenancy, which is to be decided by the Revenue Courts, and not by the Civil Court.

It is contended by the learned advocate for the petitioners that there is no doubt regarding the fact that the dispute regarding tenancy is to be decided by the Revenue Courts. However, the prayers in the present suit are not for declaration to the effect that the petitioners are tenants but for the protection of their possession of the suit property. That, the Appellate Court has observed in the impugned order that no injunction can be passed in favour of the petitioners as that would result in depriving the respondents, who are the owners of the property from Page 2 of 3 C/SCA/14758/2013 ORDER selling the property. It is submitted that the effect of the impugned order would be multiplicity of litigation, to avoid which the Trial Court had rightly passed an order of status­quo.

Issue Notice returnable on 17.10.2013. Ad­interim relief in terms of paragraph­8(B) is granted, till then.

(SMT. ABHILASHA KUMARI, J.) Gaurav+ Page 3 of 3