1

927-WP.35-19.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

927 WRIT PETITION NO.35 OF 2019

1.

Munja S/o Gyanba Dukare,

Age : 72 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Dharangaon,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

2.

Dagdoba S/o Gyanba Dukare,

Age : 81 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Dharangaon,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

… Petitioners.

(Ori.Def.Nos.1 & 2)

Versus

1.

Santabai W/o Dhondiba Awachar,

Age : 71 years, Occu : Agri. & Household,

R/o Nanalpeth, Parbhani,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

… (ori. Plaintiff)

2.

Madhav S/o Dagdoba Dukare,

Age : 61 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Dharangaon,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

3.

Sakharam S/o Gyanba Dukare,

Age : 69 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Beleshwar Nagar, Parbhani,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

4.

Padmakar S/o Sahebrao Dukare,

Age : 40 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Dharangaon,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

5.

Damodhar S/o Nivrutti Dukare,

Age : 61 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Dharangaon,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

2

927-WP.35-19.odt

6.

Dattarao S/o Bapurao Dukare,

Age : 56 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Dharangaon,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

7.

Rangnath S/o Dashrathrao Dukare,

Age : 56 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Dharangaon,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

8.

Bhagwat S/o Manikrao Dukare,

Age : 31 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Dharangaon,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

9.

Ganesh S/o Pandurang Raner,

Age : 46 years, Occu : Agriculture,

R/o Dharangaon,

Taluka and District Parbhani.

… Respondents-

(R.Nos.2 to 9 are ori.

def.Nos.3 to 10)

...

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. P. N. Kalani.

Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. M.M.Patil (Beedkar).

...

CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.

DATE : 08.01.2020

PER COURT :-

1.

Heard finally at admission stage by consent.

2.

The petitioners / original defendant Nos.1 and 2 filed an

application Exh.163 for exhibiting the sale deeds filed along

with the list Exh.144. The learned Joint Civil Judge Senior

3

927-WP.35-19.odt

Division, Parbhani by order dated 21.09.2018 below Exh.163

in Regular Civil Suit No.255 of 2011 rejected the application

with costs and further directed the defendant to adduce further

evidence for proving those documents.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioners / original

defendant Nos.1 and 2 submits that the respondent / plaintiff

has instituted the suit bearing Regular Civil Suit No.255 of

2011 for declaration of ownership and perpetual injunction in

respect of the land Gut No.121 total admeassuring 1 H. 93 R.

to the extent of 80 R. with further declaration to the effect that

decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No.150 of 2004 is not

binding upon the plaintiff. The learned counsel submits that in

paragraph No.6 of the plaint it has been specifically pleaded by

the respondent / plaintiff that the family of the defendants had

also time to time purchased the land arising out of the joint

family funds and ancestral property income and purchased the

properties from various persons in the name of head of the

joint family member and the details are given in the table

wherein at Serial Nos.5 and 6 the property purchased from one

Vishwanath out of the land Gut No.121 has been mentioned in

detail. The learned counsel submits that in paragraph No.7, it

4

927-WP.35-19.odt

has been specifically pleaded that the family of defendants out

of their joint need sold their ancestral as well as the joint

family property and the family was joint upto 1994-1995 and

as per the record available, the defendants got separated by

way of oral partition at the time of Gudhipadwa 1994. The

learned counsel submits that in paragraph No.8 Clause ‘C’ of

the plaint it has been specifically pleaded that so far as the

land Gut No.121 is concerned, initially it was owned by one

Vishwanath and out of his land initially the land admeassuring

1 H.12 R. was purchased in the name of defendant Munja

under the sale deed dated 24.03.1990 and t