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

2017 Supreme(Bom) 1635

V.M.DESHPANDE
Madhusudan Vishwanath Mule – Appellant
Versus
Gajanan Vishwanath Mule – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Abhijit L. Deshpande, Counsel.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present appeal is filed against judgment and decree passed by learned Civil Judge Junior Division at Malkapur dated 23.4.1998 in Regular Civil Suit No.44 of 1995 which was confirmed by learned Ad hoc Additional District Judge at Buldana on 13.3.2003 in Regular Civil Appeal No.67 of 1998.

2. By these two judgments and decrees, both the Courts below dismissed the suit for partition, possession, declaration, and mesne profit filed by the present appellant.

3. According to the plaint, the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 4 are real and stepbrothers and sisters.

The plaintiff being in service as a Talathi in Revenue Department was not residing in ancestral village Rohinkhed during his service period. He took voluntary retirement and, thereafter, started demanding his share in the property. The suit was restricted for the following properties:

(i) two storeyed house at village Rohinkhed, Taluka Motala, District Buldana;

(ii) an open land admeasuring 20'x20' feet adjacent to the house.

According to the plaint, these properties were ancestral properties and remained to be partitioned. In the plaint itself, it is averred that ancestral agricultural property at village Rohinkhed w


















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