VASANT RAGHOBAJI TALEKAR Vs. NATWARLAL RANTANSI THAKKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against judgment of the learned District Judge, Nagpur dismissing the petitioner's appeal against an order of detention in civil prison passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Umred under Order 39, Rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned District Judge held that entry (r) under Order 43, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as applicable to the State of Maharashtra, enumerates, an order under Rule 1, 2,4, 10 or 11 of Order 39, but it does not include Rule 2-A. Rule 2-A is, however, included in the amended Code of Civil Procedure, but because of the Bombay Amendment, according to the learned District Judge, an appeal against order passed under Order 39, Rule 2-A would not be tenable.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, but did not have benefit of hearing learned counsel for the respondent who was not available though the matter was adjourned once.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court had considered the question of tenability of such an appeal in a judgment in Harivilas Vs. Viraf,1993 11 MhLJ 1435. This Court had noted the omission of Rule 2-A in entry (r) under Order 43, Rule 1, but held that this