Back
SANDEEP V. MARNE
Willingdon Sports Club – Appellant
Versus
Nagnesh Alias B. S. Akhade – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1. Applicants have filed this Revision Application challenging the order dated 17 March 2023 passed by the Executing Court rejecting their applications at Exhibits-83 and 85 filed for issuance of possession warrant for remaining area of the suit premises. With rejection of applications for issuance of fresh possession warrants, the Executing Court has disposed of Execution Application No. 264/2010 holding that the decree in L.E. & C. Suit No. 499/545 of 1987 is fully satisfied.
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that Petitioner No. 1 is an Association of Persons and has been established as a Club in/or about 1717. Petitioner-Club is a licensee in respect of several pieces and portions of land situated at Tulshiwadi, Tardeo, Mumbai by virtue of Indentures of Lease dated 26 June 1923, 17 January 1933, 30 June 1937 and 27 December 1940 etc. According to Petitioner-Club, the land described as Plot No. A in the plan annexed to the Indenture of Lease dated 30 June 1937 is also demised in its favour. After formation of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Petitioner-Club has become the lessee of the Municipal Corporation. It claims that the land demi
The execution of a decree is limited to the specific property described in the plaint; parties cannot seek possession of additional properties not included in the original decree.
The execution of a decree is limited to the specific property described in the plaint; parties cannot seek possession of additional properties not included in the original decree.
Point of Law : Court cannot go beyond the decree and has to execute the decree as it is and the legality or validity of the decree cannot be the subject matter
The court held that a title deed must be substantiated with clear evidence, and the Survey Commissioner's findings are critical in resolving land disputes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to allow the framing of additional issues in a suit, despite the opposition of the Respondent, when it deems it necessary for....
Abandonment of an earlier suit without obtaining necessary permission under Order 23 Rule 1(4) CPC precludes the plaintiff from maintaining a subsequent suit on the same cause of action.
Courts have the inherent power to amend the decree to bring it in conformity with the judgment, and there is no period of limitation for filing an application under Section 152 of CPC.
The Executing Court must execute decrees as per their terms without questioning merits or introducing new factual disputes.
The executing court cannot deliver possession without a final decree, and unregistered deeds do not confer valid rights; dispossession without due process is illegal.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
