SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

SHESHRAO PANDHARI GHULE – Appellant
Versus
YADAV JYOTIBA BHOSALE – Respondent


Advocates:
['PATIL SHRIKANT Y', 'SHRI C R DESHPANDE', 'V P RAJE', '', 'FOR R/SOLE', 'CVTR']

{1}

sa46-16

drp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

SECOND APPEAL NO.46 OF 2016

Sheshrao s/o Pandhari Ghule

APPELLANT

Age - 80 years, Occ - Agriculture

R/o Ganjur, Taluka - Latur

District - Latur

VERSUS

Yadav s/o Jyotiba Bhosale

RESPONDENT

Age - 68 years, Occ - Agriculture

R/o Ganjur, Taluka - Latur

District - Latur

.......

Mr. V. D. Salunke h/f Mr. S. Y. Patil, Advocate for the appellant

Mr. C. R. Deshpande, Advocate for the respondent

.......

[CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.]

DATE : 5

th OCTOBER, 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1.

Defendant comes up before this court challenging two

concurrent decisions rendered hitherto, one by extra joint civil

judge, senior division, Latur in special civil suit No. 158 of 2006

dated 30th November, 2011 and the other by District Judge-4,

Latur in Regular Civil Appeal No. 400 of 2012 dated 19th

September, 2015.

2.

Parties hereto would be referred to by their original status

in the suit, such as, respondent as “plaintiff” and appellant as

“defendant”.

{2}

sa46-16

3.

There is no dispute about the fact that the defendant had

owned and possessed agricultural la

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top