The learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners, has moved a draft amendment. The same is granted and may be carried out before the next date of hearing.
Heard Mr.Mihir H.Joshi, learned Senior Advocate with Mr.S.P.Majmudar, learned advocate for the petitioners. It is submitted by him that the impugned order of the Collector dated 21-3-2012 is a cryptic one and has been passed without granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. It is further submitted that the said order is hypothetical HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Sat May 06 00:24:28 IST 2017 SCA/4971/2012 2/2 ORDER and has been passed on the basis of presumptions, without recording any definite findings.
The learned Senior Advocate has placed reliance upon Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, (1998)8 SCC 1, order dated 30-3-2011, passed in Special Civil Application No.2099 of 2011, and order dated 21-2-2011, passed in Special Civil Application No.16440 of 2010, in support of his submission that before passing an order under Section 65 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, the petitioners ought to have been heard.
Mr.Pranav S.Dave, learned Assistant Government Pleader, who appears on supply of an advance copy of the petition has submitted that the petitioners can avail of the alternative remedy of filing a Revision Application under Section 211 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, against the said order.
Issue notice for final disposal, returnable on 3- 5-2012. In addition to the normal mode of service, direct service is also permitted.
(Smt.Abhilasha Kumari,J) arg HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Sat May 06 00:24:28 IST 2017