1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO.6971 OF 2022

Damodhardas Govindprasad Sangi,

Age : 89 years, Occu : Business,

R/o. Sarafa Bazar, Nanded.

.. Petitioner

Versus

1.

Fatehsinh s/o. Kalyanji Thakkar

Since deceased through L.Rs.

i)

Rukminibai w/o. Fatehsinh Thakkar

Age : 82 years, Occu :Household,

2.

Navinbhai s/o. Kalyanji Thakkar

Age : 83 years, Occu : Business,

Both R/o. Godavari Conclave,

Vazirabad, Nanded

3.

Shri Babubhai s/o. Kalyanji Thakkar

Since deceased through L.Rs.

3-i. Sushila w/o Bharat Thakkar

Age : 72 years, Occu : Household,

R/o. Laxmi Niwas, above Deepali Travels,

Near Syndicate Bank, N.S. Road,

Mulund (West), Mumbai

3-ii. Mala w/o. Ashwin Dhiraj

Age : 64 years, Occu : Household,

R/o. R. Steam Hot, Shop No. 01,

Reva Estate, Dr. Gore Building,

M.G. Road, Mulund (West), Mumbai

4.

Girish s/o. Babubhai Thakkar

Age : 69 years, Occu : Business,

5.

Shri Ravi s/o. Babubhai Thakkar

Age : 64 years, occu : Business,

2

6.

Shri. Harish s/o. Babubhai Thakkar

Age : 59 years, Occu : Business,

Respondent Nos.4 to 6,

R/o. Near Gujrathi High School,

Deelipsingh Colony, Vazirabad, Nanded

7.

Subhashchandra @ Vishnudas s/o. Govindprasad Sangi,

Age : 74 years, Occu : Business,

8.

Santoshibai w/o. Gokuldas Sangi

Age : 59 years, Occu : Household,

9.

Priti w/o Gopal Sarda

Age : 36 years, Occu : Household,

10. Radha w/o Hemantsingh Mohatta,

Age : 35 years, Occu : Household,

11. Krishnakumar s/o Gokuldas Sangi

Age : 32 years, Occu : Business,

12. Priya d/o. Gokuldas Sangi

Age : 28 years, Occu : Education,

Respondent Nos.7 to 12 are legal heirs of

Deceased Gokuldas Govindprasad Sangi,

R/o. Sarafa Bazar, Nanded

.. Respondents

…

Mr. S.S. Gangakhedkar, Advocate for petitioner

Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Shriram V.

Deshmukh i/by. Mr. Devang R. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent

Nos.1 & 2

…

CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

RESERVED ON : 06-12-2022

PRONOUNCED ON : 12-12-2022

JUDGMENT:

.

By this petition, petitioner has challenged the order

dated 30.08.2021 passed by 2^nd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division,

Nanded below Exh.118 in Special Civil Suit No.27 of 2020 allowing

3

application filed by respondent nos.1 and 2 - original plaintiffs for

amendment of the plaint under Order-VI, Rule-17 of the Code of Civil

Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CPC’).

2.

Plaintiff nos.1 and 2 are real brothers of defendant no.1.

It is the case of plaintiffs that while obtaining lease in respect of the

suit property by their father, defendant no.1 (plaintiffs’ brother) was

minor and out of pure love and affection, their father added his name

in the lease agreement. After their father passed away, series of

litigation took place between defendant no.1 and defendant nos.5 to

11 over the suit property. Initially defendant nos.5 to 11 decided to

sell the suit property. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants ought to have

purchased the suit property jointly in the name of two plaintiffs and

defendant no.1 as the original lease deed was obtained through funds

of their father. However the sale-deeds in respect of the suit land

were admittedly executed in favour of defendant no.1 alone on

16.09.2017 (by defendant nos.5 to 11) and 09.11.2017 (by

defendant no.12). This has led to filing of Special Civil Suit No.27 of

2020 by two plaintiffs against their brother (defendant no.1), his

children (defendant nos.2 to 4) as well as defendant nos.5 to 11. In

the unamended plaint, plaintiffs prayed for 1/3rd share each in the

suit property as well as recovery thereof. They also sought

4

declaration that the sale-deeds dated 16.09.2017 and 09.11.2017 are

illegal and not binding on them. They also sought injunction against

defe