PANJIM: Holding that the Taluka Mamlatdars have jurisdiction to grant any temporary relief under the Mamlatdar’s Court Act, the High Court of Bombay at Goa quashed and set aside the order of the Additional Collector at Ponda.
The petitioners Manorati Gaude and Mukund Gaude from Dhonshi-Nageshi, Ponda had filed a writ petition challenging the Additional Collector’s impugned judgement dated December 27, 2023, stating that the Ponda Mamlatdar had no jurisdiction to grant any temporary relief under the Mamlatdar’s Court Act.
The Mamlatdar had earlier granted temporary injunction by an order dated September 12, 2023 thereby directing the respondents Guru Gaude, his wife Vithai Gaude and two others to remove the obstruction and clear the traditional access during pendency of the main application.
However, the respondents by an appeal challenged the Mamlatdar’s order of grant of temporary injunction, before the Additional Collector under Section 22 of the Mamlatdars Court Act.
Arguing on behalf of the petitioners, Adv Shivraj Gaonkar submitted that under Section 4 (2) of Mamlatdar Courts Act, the Mamlatdar has power to issue injunction to a person erecting or attempting to erect such impediment or causing or attempted to cause disturbance or obstruction requiring him to restrain from erecting or attempting to erect such impediment or causing or attempting to cause disturbance. He referred to the provisions of Goa Daman and Diu Mamlatdar Court’s Act 1966 and Rules thereunder and that the Mamlatdar is vested with the power to even summons the witnesses and examine them before him.
Representing the respondents, Adv A D Bhobe stated that a special power is given to the Mamlatdar only to grant certain reliefs as found mentioned in Section 4 of the Act and nowhere provides for grant of any interim relief or interim injunction during the pendency of the proceedings.
The single bench Judge Justice B D Deshpande in his order stated that proper course will be to remand the matter to the Additional Collector to decide the appeal on merits, since the impugned order is passed only on the aspect of powers of the Mamlatdar to grant interim relief. He quashed and set aside the Additional Collector’s order and restored the appeal to the Additional Collector III with directions to decide the appeal on merits.
