Dismissed

Eknath Laxman Shinde v. Dagu Pandurang Thete and Ors.

Bombay HC16 Jan 2013SA/1288/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissing the second appeal at the admission stage, the court held that since consolidation entries show the land in the respondents' name, the appellant's claim to possession was rightly rejected by the lower appellate court. Consolidation orders themselves remain under separate challenge.

What did the court decide?

Second Appeal dismissed at the stage of admission; Civil Application No.1727 of 2004 dismissed.

Eknath Laxman Shinde Vs Dagu Pandurang Thete and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

sa1288-04.sxw

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

SECOND APPEAL NO. 1288 OF 2004

¶4

Eknath Laxman Shinde (since deceased thorugh Lrs.) .. Appellant v/s. Dagu Pandurang Thete & others ..Respondent/s

¶5

Mr.Vikram N. Walawalkar i/b. Suresh Sabrad for the Appellant.

¶6

CORAM: R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 16^th JANUARY 2013.

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

The Regular Civil Suit No.70 of 1995 filed by the appellants in the

¶9

court of Joint Cvil Judge, Junior Division, Pimpalgaon, was decreed by judgment and decree dated 12.12.1997. The appeal filed by the aggrieved parties being Civil Appeal No.6 of 1998 in the District Court has been allowed and the judgment and decree passed by the trial court is set aside. Hence this second appeal.

¶10

The land in question is Survey No.37/213/3. The suit was for

¶11

pps 1/3

¶12

sa1288-04.sxw

¶13

restraining the original respondents from interfering with the possession of the appellants. After having perused the record it is abunduntly clear that the consolidation scheme was put into action and the suit property was shown in the name of the respondents. The present appellant was conscious of the said fact. Despite this, the present appellant put up his case that he is the owner in respect of the suit land and that he is in possession. Once the consolidation proceedings are over and if the entries have been passed in respect of certain lands those entries will have to be respected and inference will have to be drawn accordingly as otherwise it would lead to further complication. Considering that the learned trial Judge has granted the relief to the appellant. The said relief has been nullified by the judgment of the District Court. It is apparent that it was contended by the appellants before the District Court that the Consolidation Scheme has taken place and the names of the present respondents were incorporated in the said suit property. It was also contended before the Appellate Court that the suit lands have been shown in possession of the defendants wrongly. The relevant reference is found in paragraph 21 of the impugned judgment by the District Court. It is difficult to accept that such a stand was not taken by the appellant before the District Court as there is a specific contention said

¶14

pps 2/3

¶15

sa1288-04.sxw

¶16

to have been taken by the appellants and is reported in the judgment. Be that as it may. Once it is found that the names of the respondents were shown in the record after consolidation then the stand of the appellants that they were in possession of the land in question has been rightly rejected.

¶17

The court is informed that the orders passed in the consolidation proceedings are under challenge. Hence at the end of the consolidation proceedings, if the appellants succeed it will be open for them to protect their right in respect of such of the land which will be alloted to them in the said proceedings.

¶18

Second Appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission with no order as to costs.

¶19

In view of above, Civil Application No.1727 of 2004 is dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶20

[R.Y.GANOO, J.]

¶21

pps 3/3

Eknath Laxman Shinde v. Dagu Pandurang Thete and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eknath Laxman Shinde v. Dagu Pandurang Thete and Ors.

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

Sardar Chandsaheb Shaikh ( Tnhro. His Power of Attorney ) Anwar Allabakash Shaikh Vs Anusaya Maruti Jadahv

Ramdas Bhima Chavan Vs Shanabai Dnyanba Suryawanshi

Shri. Hanmant Anant Kulkarni Vs 1.) Shri. Ananda Krishna Chavan and Ors.

Mr. Pralhad Tukaram Patil Vs the Asst. Controller for Unauthorized Construcion Cidco Navi Mumbai

Smt. Vimal Laxman Jadhav Vs Smt. Janabai Laxman Suryawanshi and Anr.

Popat Khanderao Vaikande Vs Pandu Budha Vaikande