1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 3504 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 3504 OF 2011 *** 1. Heard Advocate Shri Mantri for defendant/ petitioner. In a suit for specific performance an issue about status of plaintiff whether he is agriculturist or not is already framed. Petitioner/ defendant requested trial Court to refer the same to the competent authority viz. Tahsildar for determination. That application is rejected by impugned order. Shri Mantri has various arguments to advance to assail that order. 2. However, I find that in application at Exhibit-157 present petitioner has specifically stated that the plaintiff came to India as a refugee from Pakistan and he never had and land in India. The contention before this Court is Respondent/ plaintiff nowhere has asserted that he was agriculturist or had any lands in India. 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 3504 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. 3. Thus, question whether the Respondent/ plaintiff had any land for him to cultivate is the first question which arises for determination. The occasion for reference may arise if some land is found available in India. Hence, with liberty to petitioner to challenge the impugned order after adjudication of said fact, if occasion arises, present petition is disposed of. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:04/05/2011. ans/3504