2000 Supreme(Bom) 602
R.J.KOCHAR
Ramapathi G. Pathak – Appellant
Versus
Brahmadeo Guruprasad Pathak – Respondent
JUDGMENT - R.J. KOCHAR, J.:---The original defendant has filed the present Chamber Summons for setting aside the Execution of Consent Decree dated 3-4-1999 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (SD) Bhadohi in Suit No. 60 of 1998 in respect of ½ share in shop No. 7, Koteshwar Apartment, Andheri (East), Mumbai and for 1/2 possession of shop No. 7, by restoring the same to the defendant. In support of the Chamber Summons the defendant has filed his affidavit stating out the case history and the nature of dispute. The defendant has prayed for setting aside of the execution order on the ground that the Bhadohi decree was inexecutable being in contravention of the mandatory provisions of section 17(2)(vi) of the Registration Act, 1908. I have heard both the learned Advocates for their respective parties. I have also carefully gone through the whole proceedings with the assistance of both the learned Advocates. It was submitted on behalf of the defendant that the decree was a consent decree and that the entire family property was described in the plaint. It was last submitted that the compromise decree can be registered even now under the Registration Act. Shri Pathak the learned Advoca
Click Here to Read the rest of this document