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

2014 Supreme(Bom) 2264

R.M.SAVANT
Shankar Masu Dokare – Appellant
Versus
Shobha Subhash Dokare – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant: Surel S. Shah
For the Respondent: Amit B. Borkar

Judgement Key Points

To remove highlights from a legal document, follow these general steps:

  1. Identify the method of highlighting used (e.g., digital highlights in a PDF, Word document, or printed marks).
  2. If the highlights are digital (such as in a PDF or Word document):
  3. Use the editing or annotation tools provided by the software.
  4. Select the highlighted text or area.
  5. Choose the option to remove or delete the highlight (often represented by an eraser icon or a "Remove Highlight" option).
  6. If the highlights are physical (printed marks):
  7. Use correction tools such as white correction fluid or tape to cover the highlights.
  8. Alternatively, reprint the document without highlights or scan and edit the digital copy to remove the marks.
  9. Save the document after removing the highlights to ensure the changes are retained.

Since the document in question appears to be a digital or scanned copy, the most effective approach would be to use PDF editing software or word processing tools to select and delete the highlight annotations.


Judgment

R.M. Savant, J.

1. Rule, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties made returnable forthwith and heard.

2. The writ jurisdiction of this court is invoked against the order dated 23/4/2013 passed by the learned Ad hoc District Judge-2 Solapur by which order the Application (Exhibit 15) for amendment of the Appeal being Civil Appeal No. 325 of 2012 came to be allowed and resultantly, the Respondents herein were held entitled to amend the Appeal in terms of the amendment sought vide the said Application (Exhibit 15).

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, a few facts can be stated thus :-

The Petitioner herein is the original Plaintiff who had filed the suit in question being Special Civil Suit No. 110 of 2005 for a declaration that the Petitioner is the owner of the entire suit property, and for cancellation of the sale deed executed by the Defendant No. 2 i.e. the Respondent No. 1 herein who is his daughter in favour of the Defendant No. 4. i.e. the Respondent No. 2 herein. In the said suit counter claims came to be filed by both the Defendant No. 2 and the Defendant No. 4. In so far as the Defendant No. 2 is concerned, she claimed a declaration that she has got 1/4th sh















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