Allowed

Leelabai Shankarrao Bhapkar and Othrs v. Madhavrao Maruti Bhapkar D.H. Shushila Madhav Bhapkar

Bombay HC1 Apr 2009CAF/608/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed civil applications filing in First Appeals regarding partition of suit property. The court fixed mesne profit at Rs. 12,500/month, directed deposit with the trial court, and stayed the decree in favor of respondents during the appeal pendency.

What did the court decide?

Applicants to continue possession on entire property; mens profit fixed at Rs. 12,500/mo to be deposited with trial court; decree stayed pending appeal.

Leelabai Shankarrao Bhapkar and Othrs Vs Madhavrao Maruti Bhapkar… — Partition | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

Lsp

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5431 OF 2008

¶4

¶5

FIRST APPEAL NO. 198 OF 2009 WITH C.A. NO. 608 OF 2009 IN F.A. NO.197/2009 WITH C.A. NO. 609/2009 IN F.A. NO. 198 OF 2009

¶6

Leelabai Shankarrao Bhapkar & ors. ...Applicants

¶7

v/s.

¶8

Madhavrao Maruti Bhapkar D/H. Shushila Madhav Bhapkar & ors. ...Respondents

¶9

Mr. Vineet Naik, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. A.V.Anturkar i/b. Mr. S.B.Deshmukh, Advocate for respondents 1 to 9. Mr. A.D.Tajane, Advocate for the respondent no. 10.

¶10

CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & RAVI K.DESHPANDE, JJ.

¶11

APRIL 01, 2009

¶12

P.C.

¶13

.	These	applications ha	ve been filed	by the
appellants	in	First	Appeal	No.		197/2009 and	First
Appeal	No.	198/2009	which	appeals	hav	e been admit	ted by
us	on 2	6/02/2009.	Mr.	Anturkar	with	Mr.	Deshmukh
appears	for	respondent	nos.	1 to	9	and Mr.	Tajane
appears	for	respondent	no.	10.	By	the impugned	decree
in	First	Appeal	No.	197/2009,	wh	ile dismissing	the
applicant’s		Suit	(Special	Civil	Suit	No.91/2003),	the
counter	cla	im filed	by the	defenda	nts	has been	allowed
thereby	dir	ecting	partition	of the	suit	property	and

¶14

¶15

with further direction to hand over the possession of

¶16

the undivided share of the suit property to defendant no.9.

¶17

2.	U	ndoubte	dly, th	e applic	ants are in po	ssessio	n of
the	e	ntire	suit	prope	rty as	of	now.	The	suit	property
is	a	plot	of	land	admeasuri	ng	about	4200 sq.		feet and
the		buil	ding	c	onstruction			(residential		bungalow)
admeas	uring	abou	t	1400	sq.	feet	is	standing	on	the said

¶18

plot. Defendant Nos. 1 to 9 claimed half share of the suit property.

¶19

Mr. Anturkar has placed before us the Valuer’s Certificate dated 03/03/2009. The suit property is located in Lane No. 2, Subhashnagar, Shukrawar Peth area and the entire property has been valued at Rs. 1 Crore by the valuer.

¶20

4.	After	having	heard	the learne	d counse	l for t	he
respective		parties		we	deem	it	appr	opriate to fix the
mesne		profit	at	Rs.12,	500/-	per	mo	nth on the half share
of	the	suit	pr	operty	and	to	contin	ue the possession of
the	appli	cants		on th	e e	ntire	suit	property, they are
directed	to	pay	the	said	am	ount	of	Rs.12,500/- by way of
mesne	pr	ofit.		The	said	am	ount	shall stand deposited
with	th	e tria	l	Court	by	remi	ttances	made every quarter
i.e.	R	s.37,500/-		w.e.f.		01/01/	2009.	So far as the

¶21

¶22

arrears	towa	rds the	mes	ne	profit fro	m	September	2007	to
December	2008	are	conc	erned,	the	applica	nt	shall	furnish
the	Bank	guarantee	with	the	trial C	ourt	and	it shall	be
renewed	from	time	to	time	during the	pen	dency	of	the
appeal.	Th	e a	mount	dep	osited	towards	m	esne	profit
w.e.f.		01/01/2009	shall	be	invested	by	the	trial	Court
in	fixed	deposit	with	a	nationalised	Bank	and	the	fixed
deposit	will	be	renewed	from	time to	tim	e	during	the
pendency	of	the	appeal.		None of	the	parties	shall	take
any	steps	for	creating	third	party	interes	t in	any	form
over	the	suit	property		or part	there	of	during	the
pendency	of	the	appeal.		In addi	tion,	the	decree	passed

¶23

in favour of the respondents-defendants 1 to 9 shall

¶24

stand stayed during the pendency of the appeal.

¶25

All the applications are allowed in terms of above

¶26

directions.

¶27

Should there by any default in complying with the

¶28

above directions by any of the parties, liberty to the

¶29

other to approach this Court for appropriate relief.

¶30

(B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)

¶31

(RAVI K.DESHPANDE, J)

Leelabai Shankarrao Bhapkar and Othrs v. Madhavrao Maruti Bhapkar D.H. Shushila Madhav Bhapkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Leelabai Shankarrao Bhapkar and Othrs v. Madhavrao Maruti Bhapkar D.H. Shushila Madhav Bhapkar

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

Bank of India Vs Shri Shailesh Pani Purwatha Sahakari Sanstha Ltd.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Shri Jagannath Bapu Parab

The Government of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs Pandharinath Babu Govari D/H Taibai Pandharinath Govari and Ors.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kalpana Sarjerao Dhekane and Othrs

Ismail Sulemna Sheikh Vs M.G. Sadashivan and Anr.