Leena Chaban Tonde VS Dilip Yashwant Padale

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

M. S. KARNIK
Leena Chaban Tonde – Appellant
Versus
Dilip Yashwant Padale – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
In Appeal From Order No.161 of 2021 with Interim Application No.1674 of 2021
For the Appellants:Mr. Atul G. Damle, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Hitesh P. Vyas, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Mr. Chaitanya Mulawkar i/b Mr. Sandeep S. Salunkhe, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Ms. Bindvasini Yadav, Advocate
For the Respondents Nos.7 and 9:Mr. J.P. Sen, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Makarand B. Savant, Advocate
For the Respondents Nos.11 and 12:Mr. G.S. Godbole i/b Mr. Parag Tilak, Advocate
For the Respondents Nos.13 and 14:Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. J.P. Sen, Senior Advocate, Mr. Nirman Sharma, Mr. Akshay Doctor and Mr. Parag Sawant i/b P.S. Chambers, Advocate
In Appeal From Order ST. No.2585 of 2021 with Interim Application ST. No.18922 of 2021
For the Appellants:Mr. Chaitanya Mulawkar i/b Mr. Sandeep Salunkhe, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Mr. Atul G. Damle, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Hitesh Vyas, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Ms. Bindvasini Yadav, Advocate
For the Respondents No.7 and 9:Mr. Makarand B. Savant, Advocate
For the Respondents No. 11 and 12:Mr. G.S. Godbole i/b Mr. Parag Tilak, Advocate
For the Respondents No.13 and 14:Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. J.P. Sen, Senior Advocate, Mr. Nirman Sharma, Mr. Akshay Doctor and Mr. Parag Sawant i/b P.S. Chambers, Advocate

ORDER (ORAL)

M.S. Karnik, J.—Heard learned Senior Advocate Shri Damle, appearing for the appellant, learned advocate Shri Mulawkar, appearing for respondent no. 1, learned Senior Advocate Shri Sen, appearing for the respondents no. 7 and 9, learned advocate Shri Godbole, appearing for respondents no. 11 and 12 and learned Senior Advocate Shri Dwarkadas, appearing for respondents no. 13 and 14.

2. The challenge in this appeal from order is to an order dated 26/11/2020 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division & 7th Addl. Judge, Small Causes Court, Pune, partly allowing the application- Exhibit 184 filed by the appellant-original plaintiff. The appellant filed the suit in the year 2012 for declaration that the gift deed be declared as null and void. Shorn of unnecessary details, brief facts are as under:

3. Pandurang Vishnu Padale claimed to be the absolute owner of the property in dispute. During his lifetime, Pandurang gifted the suit property to his grandson-Dilip Yashwant Padale by a gift deed dated 18/12/1957. Pandurang had two children, son- Yashwant and daughter – Godavari. Dilip–respondent no. 1- original defendant no. 1 is the son of Yaswant whereas the plaintiff–Leena is t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

M. S. KARNIKLeena Chaban Tonde – AppellantVersusDilip Yashwant Padale – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

M. S. KARNIK
Leena Chaban Tonde – Appellant
Versus
Dilip Yashwant Padale – Respondent