Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
GAURI GODSE, J
Dilip Nago Patil – Appellant
Versus
Smt. Umedbai @ Padamkuvar Bhimsing Raul – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initiation of appeal and basis of original suit. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on possession based on agreements. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. consideration of previous rulings and claims. (Para 6) |
| 4. court's findings on possession and legal standing. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. final decision and its implications. (Para 9 , 10) |
“ORDER
1. The suit is decreed with costs.
2. The defendant, his agents, servants, relatives or any person on his behalf are hereby permanently restrained from causing obstruction or interference to the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs over the suit property without due process of law.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(Pronounced in open court)”
2. The first appellate court has confirmed the decree of injunction passed by the trial court.
3. It is not disputed that the respondents-plaintiffs are owners of the suit property. What is sought to be contended on behalf of the appellant is that the plaintiffs had executed an agreement for sale in favour of one Asaram Dagadu Patil and pursuant to the agreement for sale, Asaram Dagadu Patil is in possession of the suit land. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that wife of the appellant is daughter of this Asaram Dagad
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
