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

1990 Supreme(SC) 813

R.M.SAHAI, T.K.THOMMEN
Malati Ramchandra Raut – Appellant
Versus
Mahadevo Vasudeo Joshi – Respondent


Advocates:
K.J.JOHN, MANIK KARANJAVALA, NANDINI GORE, R.P.BHATT, RAIAN KARANJAVALA, Virender Tuljapurkar

JUDGMENT

THOMMEN, J.:—Special leave granted.

2. The defendants in suit No. 400 of 1972, which is a suit for partition, appeal from the judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No. 894 of 1985 whereby the learned Judges, setting aside the judgment of the single Judge, held that the valuation of the shares of the plaintiffs in the two suit properties had to be made for the purpose of S.3 of the Partition Act, 1893 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") not as on the date when the defendants sought leave of the Court to buy the respective shares of the plaintiffs, but as on the date of the preliminary decree declaring the shares of the parties in the properties in question.

3. The suit for partition was filed by the present respondents on 17-5-1972. They averred that the nature of the suit properties was such that their division could not reasonably or conveniently be made and that their sale and distribution of the proceeds would be more beneficial for all the shareholders. The plaintiffs, therefore, prayed that the properties be sold and the proceeds distributed amongst the shareholders. The plaintiffs admitted that the defendants together held 1/3rd share in













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