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

2009 Supreme(Bom) 336

P.R.BORKAR
HARIBAI DIGAMBARRAO BHISE – Appellant
Versus
INDRABAI VENKATRAO KADAM – Respondent


( 1 ) THIS is an appeal preferred by the original defendant being aggrieved by the decree of partition and separate possession passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 86 of 76 decided by the Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Osmanabad on deputation at Kallam on 18. 12. 1980, which judgment and decree is further confirmed by the District Judge, Osmanabad in Regular Civil Appeal No. 16 of 1981 decided on 14. 10. 1985.

( 2 ) BRIEF facts giving rise to this appeal may be stated as follows : one Mukundrao had two wives, Tulsabai and rangubai. Original appellant Haribai is daughter of rangubai. Haribai expired pending this Second Appeal. Tulsabai had daughter Kaveri. Present plaintiff/respondent Indrabai is daughter of Kaveri. It is not disputed that Tulsabai, Rangubai, Kaveri had expired during life time of Mukundrao and there was no son born to Tulsabai or Rangubai or to Kaveri. Mukundrao expired on 28. 3. 1976. Present respondent/plaintiff Indrabai filed suit for partition and separate possession of the property of Mukundrao. The suit was resisted by present appellant/defendant Haribai on the ground that she is sole successor of Mukundrao, as Mukundrao had executed a will in her favour on 2





























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