Madhukar Dnyanoba Dandime v. Maharashtra State Industrial Development Corporation, Latur and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
ca621316.odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6213 OF 2016 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.226 OF 2016
Madhukar s/o Dnyanoba Dandime
Applicant
Versus
Maharashtra State Industrial Development Corporation, Latur & others
Respondents
Mr.G.N. Kulkarni (Mardikar), advocate for the applicant (intervener). Mr.S.S.Dande, advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr.P.S.Patil, AGP for Respondent No.2.
CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
K.L.WADANE, JJ. DATE : 12th August, 2016
PER COURT:
1 It is contended that in a suit for partition, decree has been passed in favour of the intervener and he has been held entitled to receive share in the amount of compensation.
2 It would be open for the intervener to execute the decree and claim the amount, which can be allotted to his share. Intervention in the appeal is not contemplated in law.
3 Keeping an option open to the intervenor to claim his share in observance of the procedure prescribed under law, Civil Application is disposed of.
K.L.WADANE
JUDGE
R.M.BORDE
JUDGE
adb/ca621316
2 issues framed by the court
Whether intervention is contemplated in law in an appeal from a partition suit decree.
Whether the interventor's share in the compensation amount can be claimed in this proceeding.
Madhukar s/o Dnyanoba Dandime
Maharashtra State Industrial Development Corporation, Latur
Madhukar s/o Dnyanoba Dandime
R.M.Borde
K.L.Wadane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court