1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3737 OF 2009 1 Deelipkumar Gaurishankar Agrawal age 56 years, occ. business r/o Bodwad, Tq. Bodwad Dist. Jalgaon. 2 Rushikesh Pradipkumar Agrawal age 23 years, occ. business r/o as above. 3 Pradeepkumar Gaurishankar Agrawal age 48 years, occ. business r/o as above. Petitioner nos. 2 and 3 through General Power of Attorney holder i.e. petitioner no. 1. .. PETITIONERS VERSUS Grampanchayat Bodwad Tq. Bodwad, Dist. Jalgaon Through Sarpanch .. RESPONDENT Mr. G.V. Wani, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. A.M. Gholap, Advocate for respondent. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 16 th November, 2009 2 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1 Heard. 2 Rule. With the consent of the parties, matter is taken up for final disposal at admission stage. 3 Petitioners are raising exception to the order passed below exh. 22 in Civil Miscellaneous Application no. 2/2006 by the 3 rd Jt. Civil Judge, Sr.Dn., Jalgaon on 31-1-2009. 4 Petitioner herein presented contempt application requesting the trial court to take action against respondent for violating the terms of compromise decree recorded in Regular Civil Suit no. 34/2000. The proceeding came to be registered as Contempt Application no. 2/2006. In the pending proceeding, the petitioner herein presented application seeking appointment of Taluka Inspector of Land Records as Court Commissioner for conducting measurement of the property. Accordingly, the Taluka Inspector, Land Records conducted measurement and submitted report to the court. Petitioner herein was not satisfied with the proceedings taken up by the Court Commissioner and as such approached the 3 Superintendent of Land Records for reviewing the action of the TILR. The Superintendent, Land Records, Jalgaon directed the petitioner to secure appropriate orders from the civil court. As such, the petitioner tendered application in pending contempt proceeding seeking appointment of the District Inspector of Land Records as Court Commissioner. The application came to be rejected by the trial court holding that the petitioner shall approach the appellate authority provided under the Land Revenue Code and raise challenge to the order passed by the superintendent, Land Records. Order passed by the trial court while dealing with contempt proceeding is subjected to challenge in this petition. 5 I have perused the order passed by the trial court. On perusal of the order, I am of the opinion that it is for the trial court to decide whether the second Commissioner shall be appointed or not and it is not a matter to be left for consideration of the appellate authority provided under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. Order passed by the trial court below exh. 22 is erroneous and therefore, liable to be quashed and set aside. Learned counsel for the respondent contends that the contempt application presented by the petitioner itself is not entertainable by the civil court. Objection is raised in the say presented by the respondent 4 contending that the application is not in accordance with law. However, detailed objection for entertainability of the contempt proceeding is not specifically raised. Respondent contends that proper application would be presented to the civil court within two weeks from today. If such an application is presented by respondent raising exception to the entertainability of the contempt proceeding, trial court shall decide the issue in respect of entertainability of the proceeding simultaneously while dealing with application exh. 22 and pass order thereon. In this view of the matter, rule is accordingly made absolute. Order passed by the 3 rd Jt. Civil Judge, Sr.Dn., Jalgaon on 31-1-2009 below exh. 22 in Civil Misc. Application no. 2/2006 is quashed and set aside. Trial court is directed to decide the application exh. 22 afresh in accordance with the provisions of law. Trial court also shall simultaneously consider the objection, if any, raised by the respondent in respect of entertainability of the contempt proceeding. In the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be no order as to costs. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/wp3737.09.odt