Dismissed

Laxmibai Limbaji Bankar. v. Eknath Keshav Bankar.

Bombay HC13 Jun 2012SA/265/1990

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Second Appeal, the High Court of Judicialature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. The appellant had filed a suit for possession following her husband's death, but since the respondent had obtained a final decree for specific performance against the appellant, the Court held the possession suit was not maintainable.

What did the court decide?

The Second Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

Laxmibai Limbaji Bankar. Vs Eknath Keshav Bankar. — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

S.A.No.265/1990.

¶3

 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

 APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶6

SECOND APPEAL NO.265 OF 1990.

¶7

Smt.Laxmibai Limbaji Bankar Vs. Eknath Keshav Bankar.

¶8

Office Notes, Office
Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's
orders or directions
andRegistrar's
orders.

¶9

Court's or Judge's orders

¶10

Mr.V.S.Bedre, advocate for the appellant.
Mr.V.R.Dhorde, advocate holding for Mr.R.N.Dhorde,
advocate for the Respondent.

¶11

 CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.

¶12

 Date : 13.06.2012.

¶13

PER COURT :

¶14

Heard.

¶15

The appellant is the original plaintiff had filed a suit for possession. The trial Court dismissed the suit. The plaintiff filed an appeal. The District Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. The plaintiff has assailed the said judgment in the present Second Appeal.

¶16

The present Second Appeal is admitted on 9.8.1990, without any substantial question of law being framed but as the appeal is of 1990, I have heard the appeal on merits.

¶17

Mr.Bedre, learned counsel submits that the Court below has

¶18

erroneously dismissed the suit. It is undisputed that the suit land

¶19

¶20

S.A.No.265/1990.

¶21

was owned by the husband of the plaintiff and after his death, the plaintiff became the owner of the property. The agreement of sale relied by the defendant is not proved. According to the learned counsel, both the Courts have misread the evidence on record. The perverse appreciation of evidence involves substantial question of law.

¶22

Mr.V.R.Dhorde, learned counsel for the Respondent submits that even the suit filed by the present Respondent for specific performance of contract of the agreement of sale executed by the husband of the plaintiff has been decreed. The suit was filed against the present plaintiff and the specific performance has been granted in favour of the Respondent. The said judgment has become final. According to the learned counsel, both the Courts have properly considered all the aspects.

¶23

With the assistance of the learned counsel, I have gone through the judgment. Once the suit for specific performance has been decreed in favour of the present Respondent and as against present appellant then in such circumstances, the present appellant can not claim possession of the said property. The District Court has observed that there is nothing on record to show that the present plaintiff had preferred appeal against the said decision. In view of the fact that the said decision has become final, the plaintiff herein could not have maintained the suit for possession.

¶24

¶25

S.A.No.265/1990.

¶26

In view of the above, no substantial question of law arises in the present appeal.

¶27

The Second Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.

¶28

(S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)

¶29

Dt.13.06.2012. asp/office/Sa265.90

Laxmibai Limbaji Bankar. v. Eknath Keshav Bankar.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmibai Limbaji Bankar. v. Eknath Keshav Bankar.

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

Kaluram Umala Rathod Vs Moti Pattu and Others

Kaluram Umala Rathod Vs Moti Pattu and Others

Govinda Rama Limbalkar Deceased Th Lrs Anand Govind Limbotkar and Ors. Vs Ganpati Malaba Limbalkar and Another.

Ganpatrao Yashwantrao Deshmukh. and Others. Vs Purushottam Shriniwas Joshi (L.Rs.)Kishanrao.

Pandurang Jagannath Agrawal. Vs Gangabai Balmukund Agrawal and Others.

Deorao Tukaram Mehetre Deceased Lrs and Ors. Vs Bapu Tukaram Mehetre Deceased Lrs and Ors.