1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BEN CH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 3701/2009. ( Madan S. Jadhao . -: versus :- Baban D. kale and others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : JANUARY 29, 2010. Heard finally by consent of Shri K.S. Narwade, learned counsel for petitioner and Shri D.A. Sonwane, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3. By order dated 06.11.2009, this Court has restricted consideration of issue only to the point of jurisdiction of Civil Court, because of Section 36A read with Section 36C of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. Learned counsel for petitioner has argued that the plaint itself in paragraph no.3 contained necessary material to point out those provisions and bar is apparent when those provisions are read into. He therefore states that no amendment to written statement was necessary and a question of law could have been raised by the petitioner / defendant at any time. Learned counsel for respondents on the other hand argues that an issues were already framed and respondent / plaintiff has already filed his examination-in- 2 chief. He further argues that as there was no specific plea of bar of jurisdiction in written statement, effort to amend it was made and it came to be rejected. It is apparent that in view of the provisions of Section 36A read with Section 36C of the M.L.R. Code, the petitioner / defendant wants to point out to Civil Court that it has no jurisdiction. Bar contained is in enactment of State Government and necessary facts are already placed on record. Bar therefore could have been pressed into service at any time by petitioner / defendant and it was not necessary for him to amend written statement. In this situation, if an express issue is framed, it is in the interest of all concerned, and also easier for the trial Court to appreciate the controversy. Hence the impugned order dated 14.07.2008 passed below Exh.61D (Annexure-C) is hereby partly quashed and set aside. The additional issue about jurisdiction of Civil Court to try and maintain the suit as filed as sought for in paragraph no.3 only be framed. Writ Petition is thus partly allowed. Trial Court to frame the issue as sought for in paragraph no.3 of Exh.61-D and to proceed further with the trial. Liberty to plaintiff to file additional affidavit of examination of chief, if he is so advised. Rule accordingly. No cost. JUDGE Rgd.