Dismissed

Mr. Vinayak Kalyan Narvekar and Ors. v. Smt. Kunda Rohit Ganatra Nee Kunda Rohit Marathey

Bombay HC17 Apr 2013CAF/111/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court accepted the appellants' undertaking to voluntarily vacate the suit premises within two months, granted time instead of immediate execution, dismissed the appeal, and disposed of the civil application.

What did the court decide?

Concession granted of two months to vacate the suit premises voluntarily; appeal dismissed as not pressed; civil application disposed of.

Mr. Vinayak Kalyan Narvekar and Ors. Vs Smt. Kunda… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

1 fa95.13

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO.95 OF 2013 WITH

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.111 OF 2013 IN F.A. NO.95 OF 2013

¶6

Vinayak Kalyan Narvekar & Ors. .. Appellants. Vs.

¶7

Kunda Rohit Ganatra nee Kunda Shankar Marathey .. Respondent.

¶8

Mr. Hemant Ghadigaonkar for the appellants. Mr. Niranjan Pandit with Ms. Tanmayee Salekar and Ms. Rishika Jhaveri for the respondent.

¶9

CORAM : A. H. JOSHI, J. DATED : 17TH APRIL, 2013.

¶10

This case was adjourned for enabling learned Advocate for the appellant to take instructions and state as to whether appellant wants to approach Hon'ble Supreme Court against proceedings where he has lost his plea that he is a tenant.

¶11

Learned Advocate for the appellants state that the appellants have accepted said judgment and they do not propose to approach Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶12

Learned Advocate for the appellants has taken instructions and states that the appellants would accept the decree under appeal. He further states that they pray for two months time for vacating the suit premises be granted. He states that the appellants would file required undertaking to that effect.

¶13

Heard parties on the point of granting time of two months.

¶14

2 fa95.13

¶15

Considering the rival submissions and the appellants request for grant of two months time to vacate voluntarily on his own and without plaintiffs being required to execute the decree, the concession is accepted subject to following conditions :-

¶16

(A) Appeal is dismissed as not pressed.

¶17

(B) The appellants i.e. all defendants shall file an undertaking in this court as well as trial / executing court on or before 25/4/2013 that they shall vacate and cease to occupy the suit premises i.e. open land in front of gala within two months from today, without plaintiffs' being required to file any proceedings for execution.

¶18

(C) The undertaking shall state that third party interest whatsoever is not created so far and would not be created, and possession would not be parted with, it shall be given to plaintiffs, on the next day after compilation of two months from today, if at all possession is to be handed over before due date, it shall be handed over to the plaintiffs.

¶19

(D) The affidavit be filed on or before 25th April, 2013. If the same is not filed, decree shall be executed at once.

¶20

(E) Civil application does not survive and is disposed of.

¶21

(A. H. JOSHI, J.)

Mr. Vinayak Kalyan Narvekar and Ors. v. Smt. Kunda Rohit Ganatra Nee Kunda Rohit Marathey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Vinayak Kalyan Narvekar and Ors. v. Smt. Kunda Rohit Ganatra Nee Kunda Rohit Marathey

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

Naveen Dsouza and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Shri Vinod Lalji Hariya and Ors.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Shri Vinod Lalji Hariya and Ors.

Vijay Sardarilal Mehra and Anr. Vs Shakuntala Indru Bhavnani and Ors.

Anil Bhaurao Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shukraj Pandhurang Ghadge Vs the State of Maharashtra