R.M.LODHA, MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA
SHANTI BUDHIYA VESTA PATEL – Appellant
Versus
NIRMALA JAYPRAKASH TIWARI – Respondent
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. — Leave granted.
2. In the present appeals, the appellants have challenged the legality and validity of the order dated 12.10.2007 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay whereby the High Court dismissed all the three Civil Applications preferred by the appellants herein seeking recall of an earlier order dated 13.06.2006 passed by the High Court which was based on the consent terms duly signed by all the parties.
3. In order to properly appreciate the precise nature and scope of the controversy arising in the present appeals, it would be appropriate as well as expedient to set out a brief statement of pertinent facts. The original appellant, Budhiya Vesta Patel, was the predecessor-in-interest of the present appellants. Budhiya Vesta Patel was appointed as a watchman by one R.K. Tiwari, who was cultivating grass on the suit property since 1954-55, to take care of the suit property and for this a Kachcha shed on the suit property was provided to him. In due course of time, Budhiya Vesta Patel extended the shed to construct a chawl known as Budhiya Patel Chawl consisting of 38 rooms, which were let-out by him.
4. After the death of the rea
2. Mahabir Gope v. Harbans Narain Singh 1952 SCR 775.
4. All India Film Corporation Ltd. V. Raja Gyan Nath (1969) 3 SCC 79].
5. Bvrarn Pestonji Gariwala Vs. Union Bank of India and Others (1992) 1 SCC 31.
6. Bishundeo Narain v. Seogeni Rai 1951 SCR 548.
7. Shankar Sitaram Sontakke v. Balkrishna Sitaram Sontakke AIR 1954 SC 352.
1. Jineshwardas (D) by LRs & Ors. Vs. Jagrani (Smt.) & Anr (2003) 11 SCC 372.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.