SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Bom) 734

A.M.KHANWILKAR
Bhagwanji Karsanbhai Rathod – Appellant
Versus
Surajmal Anandraj Mehta – Respondent


JUDGMENT - KHANWILKAR A.M., J.:—Rule.

2.Rule made returnable forthwith by consent.

3.As short question is involved, matter taken up for final disposal forthwith by consent.

4.This writ petition takes exception to the judgment and order passed by the 8th Additional District Judge, Pune dated 7th March, 2002 in Civil Appeal No. 51 of 2002. The petitioner claims to be owner of suit flat consisting of six rooms with attached W.C. and bath room in Building known as Shrikrishna Apartment situated at S. No. 557/8 final plot No. 473/30 Gultekdi, Pune. The petitioners father instituted a suit for possession against respondent being Civil Suit No. 1044 of 1986. This suit was decreed against respondent and respondent was ordered to deliver possession of the suit premises. Against that decision, respondent unsuccessfully carried the matter in appeal and latter before this Court by way of writ petition as well as appeal before Apex Court. To put it differently, decree for possession against respondent came to be confirmed right upto the Apex Court. During the pendency of the suit, petitioners father, who had instituted the suit expired and, petitioner was substituted as heir and legal representati





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top