Dismissed

Navnath Murlidhar Shinde and Another v. Anant Waman Shinde and Another

Bombay HC29 Apr 2014AO/12/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bench dismissed the appeal against a District Court order remanding a civil suit to the Trial Court. The High Court held that the first appellate court was correct in remanding the matter to allow the defendant, who did not initially appear, an opportunity to file a written statement and decide the dispute on merits regarding property ownership. The District Court's direction to

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed and the impugned order of the District Court was upheld.

Navnath Murlidhar Shinde and Another Vs Anant Waman Shinde… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

AO No. 12/2014

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 12 OF 2014 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 893 OF 2014

¶5

Navnath s/o. Murlidhar Shinde and Anr. ....Appellants. (Ori. Plff.)

¶6

Versus

¶7

Anant s/o. Waman Shinde and Anr.

¶8

....Respondents. (Ori. Defts)

¶9

Mr. V.D. Gunale, Advocate for appellants. Mr. P.B. Rakhunde, Advocate for respondent No.1.

¶10

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J. DATED : 29th April, 2014.

¶11

ORDER :

¶12

The appeal is filed against the decision of R.C.A. No. 122/2013, which was pending in the Court of District Judge - 1, Osmanabad. The District Court has set aside the judgment and decree of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division from Osmanabad delivered in R.C.S. No. 9/2009 and the matter is remanded back to the Trial Court.

¶13

AO No. 12/2014

¶14

¶15

This Court has gone through the judgment of R.C.S. No. 9/2009. The suit was filed for setting aside the sale deed executed in favour of defendant No. 2 and for declaration that on the basis of will made in favour of plaintiffs they have become owners of the property sold to defendant No. 2. Only the State Government/defendant No. 1 contested the suit. Defendant No. 2 did not appear and the Trial Court observed that summons was served on defendant No. 2. Thus, the suit proceeded exparte against defendant No. 2.

¶16

The District Court has held that in view of nature of dispute and the fact that it is exparte decree against the appellant of R.C.A. No. 122/2013, opportunity needs to be given to appellant/defendant No. 2 to take the decision on merits. It appears that the decree was already executed and the First Appellate Court has remanded the matter only to give an opportunity to defendant No. 2 to file written statement and to take decision on merits. Direction is also given to expeditiously dispose of the case and in any case, before 30.7.2014.

¶17

The learned counsel for the appellants submits that when the suit summons was served, the First Appellate Court ought not to have made the order of remand. There is no force in

¶18

AO No. 12/2014

¶19

¶20

this contention. The First Appellate Court has considered the dispute between the parties, which include the dispute between defendant No. 2 and original owner - Krishnabai. There was only agreement of sale in favour of present appellants, but the property was sold under the registered sale deed in favour of defendant No. 2. Then a civil suit was filed by Krishnabai. The suit was dismissed. The matter was then withdrawn by the appellants. The said suit was filed in respect of the same lands. On the basis of sale deed, the Trial Court has held that the plaintiffs have become the owners of the property. The property was in possession of the defendant No. 2 and he had given the property to Maharashtra State Khadi Gram-Udyog Mandal by way of mortgage. In view of these circumstances, this Court holds that the District Court has not committed any error in remanding the matter back to the Trial Court and taking the decision on merits after considering the defence of defendant No. 2. No case is made out of interference.

¶21

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed. The Civil Application is also disposed of.

¶22

[ T.V. NALAWADE, J. ]

¶23

ssc/

Navnath Murlidhar Shinde and Another v. Anant Waman Shinde and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navnath Murlidhar Shinde and Another v. Anant Waman Shinde and Another

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

Bhanudas Yashwant Nagawade. Vs Dhondiba @ Bhimrao Bhanudas Nagawade and Others.

Ram Deorao Darade and Ors. Vs Madhukar Baliram Tidke and Ors.

Irshad Abdul Zikare and Others Vs Sunil Shivling Tawaskar and Others

Gangadhar Mokindrao Deshmukh (Died) Narhari Gangadhar Kadam and Ors. Vs Sumanbai Rustumrao Siraskar and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra and Another Vs Kishore Sugnamal Sainani and Seven Others

Mandakinibai Chandranath Sanghai Vs Manoharrao Bapurao Sanghai and Anr.