1 W.P.No.4536/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.4536 OF 2011. 1. Shivram S/o Raoji Gavit, Age 63 years, 2. Smt.Shevantabai W/o Punya Gavit, Age 65 years, 3. Reva S/o Raoji Gavit, Age 59 years, All by occupation Agriculturists, All R/o Suli, Post Kalda, Tq.Nawapur, Dist.Nandurbar. ... Petitioners. Versus Madhukar S/o Akhatya Gavit, Age 45 years, Occ.Govt.servant, R/o Lahan Chinchpada, Post Nawapur, Taluka Nawapur, Dist.Nandurbar. ... Respondent. ... Mr.J.R.Shah, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.R.C.Patil, advocate for the Respondent. ... CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 22.08.2011. 2 W.P.No.4536/11 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. 2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing. 3. The petitioners are the original plaintiffs who have filed suit for perpetual injunction. Along with the suit they also filed an application for temporary injunction. The trial Court rejected application for temporary injunction. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed Misc. Appeal before the District Court. The present petitioners failed to provide the paper book as is required under para 461(ii) of the Civil Manual. In view of that the District Court dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved thereby, the present Writ Petition is filed. 4. Mr.J.R.Shah, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Court has taken a hypher-technical approach while dismissing the Misc. Appeal. Inadvertently the paper book could 3 W.P.No.4536/11 not be filed on the scheduled date. The Court below should have granted an opportunity to the petitioners to file the paper book. 5. Mr.R.C.Patil, learned counsel for the Respondent strenuously opposes the petition and submits that ample opportunity was granted to the petitioners to file the paper book, still, he has failed. The provisions of Manual have not been complied. Without availability of the paper book, the Court could not have proceeded with the matter. According to the learned counsel, the petitioners do not deserve any opportunity to be granted. 6. It is a trite law that when technical considerations and cause for substantial justice are pitted against each other, the cause for substantial justice should be sub-served. The paper book is required to be filed as per para 461(ii) of the Civil Manual. The same is a part of the procedural law. No doubt, the petitioners have failed to comply with the said provision in filing the paper book. However, the said lapse 4 W.P.No.4536/11 can be condoned. The parties are illiterate and it is submitted that the petitioners are Adiwasis coming from tribal area. 7. Taking into account above conspectus of the matter, I quash and set aside the order impugned and make Rule absolute in terms of prayer clause (A) on condition that the petitioners submit the paper book on or before 5th September, 2011. The parties shall appear before the concerned District Court on 5.9.2011. No costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) asp/office/wp4536.11