Dismissed

Srhi. Prakash Ramu @ Ramchandra Kore Anr. Anr. v. Smt. Suman @ Hirabai Shankar Chougale @ Chougule and Anr.

Bombay HC14 Oct 2015WP/10481/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay Civil Appellate Jurisdiction dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of an application to re-examine witnesses in a property suit. The court held that no case for interference was made out as the suit was at the stage of final arguments when the original Will Deed was not produced earlier despite opportunities.

What the court decided

AI extract

Srhi. Prakash Ramu @ Ramchandra Kore Anr. Anr. Vs Smt… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

14.10.2015

¶2

WPST-12122-15.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.12122 OF 2015

¶5

Shri. Prakash Ramu @ Ramchandra Kore and another .. Petitioners Versus Smt. Suman @ Hirabai Shankar Chougale @ Chougule and another .. Respondents

¶6

Mr. Mithun Mahajan, for the Petitioners.

¶7

CORAM : R.M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 14^th OCTOBER, 2015

¶8

P.C.

¶9

1. The Writ Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked against the order dated 17.02.2015 passed by the Learned 11^th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Kolhapur, by which order the application Exh.61 for being permitted to re-examine the witnesses came to be rejected. The rejection is on the ground that in spite of opportunity granted, the Petitioners i.e. the original Defendant Nos.1 and 2 have not produced the original of the Will Deed. The instant application has been filed on the ground that the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 are now in possession of the original Will Deed. The said application was filed at the stage when the suit was set down for final arguments. It seems that on 20.09.2014 they had moved an

1 of 2

BGP .

14.10.2015

WPST-12122-15.doc

¶14

application Exh.53 on the ground that they are not in possession of the original Will Deed and therefore, they may be permitted to produce the copy of the said Will Deed and therefore witness summons be issued to the Sub-Registrar, Shirol to produce the original. The said application came to be rejected.

¶15

2. Thereafter the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 have filed the instant application on the ground that they are now in possession of the original Will Deed. The Trial Court has rejected the said application having regard to the stage at which the suit was when the application was filed and also on the ground that in spite of opportunities the Will Deed was not produced. In my view, no case for interference in the Writ Jurisdiction of this Court is made out. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶16

[R.M. SAVANT, J]

¶17

2 of 2

¶18

BGP .

Srhi. Prakash Ramu @ Ramchandra Kore Anr. Anr. v. Smt. Suman @ Hirabai Shankar Chougale @ Chougule and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Srhi. Prakash Ramu @ Ramchandra Kore Anr. Anr. v. Smt. Suman @ Hirabai Shankar Chougale @ Chougule and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Process Pums (I) Private Limited Vs Eagle Burgmann India Pvt. Ltd.

Shri Ramnath Bansilal Golecha Vs Smt. Chandradevi Laxmanrao Bhosale and Ors.

Shri. Ramnath Bansilal Golecha Vs Smt. Chandradevi Laxmanrao Bhosale and Ors.

Vijayanand Bhaskar Churi (Since) D/H Vs M/S. Sonal Construction

Hindurao Ganu Patil Vs Balawant Pandurang Patil through Poa, Rajiv S. Mulik and Ors.

Dhanubai Dagadu Kore Vs Indu Vitthal More and Anr.