Dismissed

Tukaram Vithal Sonawane v. Smt. Sonubai Shankar Paradhi ( Since Decd. Thro. L. H. ) Suresh Shankar Paradhi

Bombay HC12 Oct 2007SA/353/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two second appeals, the High Court of Bombay rejected challenges to an appellate decree declaring three sale deeds invalid due to lack of consideration. The court affirmed the lower court's findings based on witness evidence and dismissed the appeals.

What did the court decide?

The second appeals were dismissed and the impugned judgment of the first appellate court was affirmed.

Tukaram Vithal Sonawane Vs Smt. Sonubai… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE

¶3

 SECOND APPEAL NO.240 OF 2007
 Along with

¶4

 Civil Application No.479 of 2007

¶5

 Laxman Mrlidhar Gharat & Ors, .. Appellants
 Applicants
 (Orig.Respdts)

¶6

 Mr Sonal h/f Filji Fredrick, for the appellants.
 Mr T Sonawane h/f Mr M.M.Sathaye for respondent no.1.

¶7

Vs

¶8

 Sonubai Shankar Pardhi,
 since deceased through her L.R
 Suresh Shankar Pardhi and ors. .. Respondents
 (R.No.1-Orig.
 Appellant.)

¶9

 SECOND APPEAL NO.353 OF 2007
 Along with

¶10

 Civil Application No.712 of 2007

¶11

 Tukaram Vithal Sonawane and Anr. Appellants
 Vs

¶12

 Sonubai Shankar Paradi & ors. Respondents.

¶13

 Mr M.S. Karnik for the appellants.

¶14

 Mr Tushar Sonawane h/f Mr M.M.Sathaye for respondent
 no.1.

¶15

CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J.

¶16

DATED : 12.10.2007

¶17

P.C.:

¶18

 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶19

 2. Defendant nos 1 to 3 and 6 and 7 have filed

¶20

 these two appeals challenging the judgment and order
 dated 22.9.2006 passed by the first appellate court, by
 which an appeal filed by the original plaintiff has

¶21

¶22

 been allowed and consequently the judgment and order
 dismissing the suit stands set aside. The suit was
 filed by one Sonubai against defendant nos 1 to 5 for
 declaration that the three sale deeds, Exhibits 59,60
 and 61 dated 13.10.98, 13.10.1988 and 27.2.1989
 respectively executed by Sonubai in favour of the
 defendants are invalid and illegal and they are not
 binding upon her.

¶23

 3. Sonubai died during pendency of the suit and in
 her place, her adopted son Suresh contested the suit
 and the appeal. Suresh is the son of Sonubai’s sister
 Kamlabai while defendant nos 1, 2 and 3 are the sons of
 her another sister Chimbai. Defendant nos 4 and 5 are
 the sons-in-law of Chimabai and defendant nos 6 and 7
 claim to be the purchasers of the suit properties from
 defendant nos 1 to 3.

¶24

 4. Learned counsel for the appellants in both the
 appeals mainly addressed this Court on the point
 whether the sale deeds were executed without
 consideration in favour of defendant nos 1 to 5. In
 support of their contention, my attention was invited
 to the evidence of D.W.1 Defendant no.1; DW 4 Parvat
 Thakare, Bond Writer DW-5 and the clerk in the office
 of the Sub Registrar. According to defendant no.1, an
 amount of consideration was paid at the time of

¶25

¶26

 execution of an agreement of sale dated 13.6.1998 and
 the balance was paid in the presence of the
 Sub-Registrar at the time of registration of the
 document. According to the appellants, evidence of DW
 4 and DW 6 support their contention. In my opinion,
 their evidence is of no avail to the appellants at all
 since none of the witnesses, except defendant no.1,
 specifically states as to how much amount was paid to
 Sonubai and when and where. Defendant no.1 in his
 evidence does not state that the bond writer and other
 witnesses were present when the amount was paid to
 Sonubai. The Bond writer does not make reference to
 the payment of consideration at all. Similarly the
 clerk in the office of the Sub Registrar does not state

¶27

 that the amount was paid in his presence. D.W 4
 Thakare, though states that some amount was paid before
 the Sub-Registrar, does not state how much amount was
 paid. That apart, the defendants have not brought any
 material on record to show how they raised the funds
 for making payment of almost one lac of rupees to
 Sonubai as a consideration for the three sale deeds.
 The appellate court has considered the evidence on
 record in proper perspective and in paragraphs 17 to 20
 has rightly held that the sale deeds at Exhibits 59,60
 and 61 were without consideration and hence they are
 invalid. On this count alone these two appeals deserve
 to be dismissed.

¶28

¶29

 5. Learned counsel for the parties fairly stated

¶30

 that they do not have a good case on the point of
 adoption and, therefore, they did not advance their
 arguments on that point. Insofar as point of fraud and
 misrepresentation is concerned, they did advance their
 submissions. I am satisfied that the findings of the
 appellate court on the point of consideration are just
 and proper and deserve no interference by this court.
 In my opinion, even the findings recorded by the
 appellate court on all the points are entirely based on
 the evidence on record and no interference is called
 for in these appeals. Hence the second appeals stand
 dismissed. As a consequence thereof, the civil
 applications are disposed of.

¶31

(D.B.BHOSALE,J.)

Tukaram Vithal Sonawane v. Smt. Sonubai Shankar Paradhi ( Since Decd. Thro. L. H. ) Suresh Shankar Paradhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tukaram Vithal Sonawane v. Smt. Sonubai Shankar Paradhi ( Since Decd. Thro. L. H. ) Suresh Shankar Paradhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Kamal Shivaji Walunj and Ors. Vs Maruti Shankar Walunj

Magan Shankar Pathak ( Thro. Legal Presentatives) Smt. Yamunabai Magan Papthak and Ors. Vs Sham Shankar Pathak and Ors.

v.k. chopra and Anr. Vs m/s niraj cement structurals Pvt. Ltd.

Chandulal Premraj Gadiya Vs Nandubai Mohanlal Gadiya and Ors.

Shri Lalxman Murlidhar Gharat Vs Smt. Sonubai Shankar Pardhi (Since Decd. Thro. Her L. H. ) Suresh Shankar Pardhi

Vijaymala Appasaheb Khot Vs Nagu Bandu Khot