Ricabdas Achaldas Oswal vs Baburao Bhujballi Bahirshet

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - APPELLATE SIDE,BOMBAY
A.S.OKA, J
Ricabdas Achaldas Oswal – Appellant
Versus
Baburao Bhujballi Bahirshet – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.C.G.Gavnekar
For the Respondents: Mr.A.M.Kulkarni

Table of Content
1. writ petition challenges order of party addition in mortgage suit. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments address non-joinder and necessity of additional parties. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court elaborates statutory provisions related to addition of parties. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
4. court clarifies ruling on addition with retrospective effect. (Para 9)
5. final order is partly allowed with conditions for future proceedings. (Para 10)

JUDGMENT:

. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. The petitioner is the 1st defendant in the suit filed by the 1st respondent. The challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to an order dated 9th August 2000 passed by the learned trial Judge by which an application made by the 1st respondent under Rule 17 of Order VI read with Order XXII and section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code) has been allowed. The suit is filed by the 1st respondent for redemption of mortgage.

There is a prayer for possession.

2. An application at Exhibit 138 was made by the 1st respondent. It was contended in the application that the heirs of the original mortgagee were brought on record. R

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - APPELLATE SIDE,BOMBAYA.S.OKA, JRicabdas Achaldas Oswal – AppellantVersusBaburao Bhujballi Bahirshet – Respondent

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - APPELLATE SIDE,BOMBAY
A.S.OKA, J
Ricabdas Achaldas Oswal – Appellant
Versus
Baburao Bhujballi Bahirshet – Respondent