Allowed

Padminbai Manikrao Anargatte Deceased through L Rs Shaliwan Manikrao Anargatte and Others v. Manikrao Gangaram Anargatte and Others

Bombay HC2 Nov 2017WP/1546/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed challenging an order rejecting amendment to plaint. Court allowed amendment to add parties and question validity of sale deed, despite late stage, ordering costs.

What did the court decide?

Amendment application Exh. 42 allowed; costs Rs. 15,000 paid to respondents No.2 to 4 within four weeks.

What the court decided

Padminbai Manikrao Anargatte Deceased through L Rs… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

1 WP 1546-2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 1546 of 2016

¶4

Padminbai W/o Manikrao Anargatte, (DIED) Through legal representatives petitioners No. 2 and 3

¶5

Shaliwan W/o Manikrao Anargatte, age 54 years occupation service R/o Hawgi Swami Galli, Udgir Tal. Udgir Dist. Latur

¶6

Satyawan S/o Manikrao Anargatte, age 45 years occupation and R/o as above. ... PETITIONERS

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Manikrao S/o Gangaram Anargatte, age 80 years occupation pensioner R/o Hawgi Swami Galli, Udgir Tal. Udgir Dist. Latur.

¶9

Shantabai W/o Manikrao Anargatte, age 50 years occupation household R/o Hawgi Swami Galli, Udgir Dist. Latur.

¶10

Minakshi W/o Shivraj Ladade, age 29 years occup. and R/o as above.

¶11

Kum. Champa D/o Manikrao Anargatte, age 26 years occup. and R/o as above.

¶12

Rajkumar S/o Satyawan Anargatte, age 30 years occup. business R/o as above.

¶13

... RESPONDENTS

¶14

Mr Anand V. Patil (Indrale), Advocate for petitioners Mr B.M. Dhanure, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4

¶15

CORAM : NITIN .W. SAMBRE, J.

¶16

DATE : 2^nd November, 2017

¶17

2 WP 1546-2016

¶18

ORAL ORDER :

¶19

Defendant No.5/present respondent No.5 has purchased the suit property, vide sale deed dated 6^th July 2011. Though by virtue of said relationship he was added as party in the suit, petitioners/plaintiffs have failed to seek amendment in the plaint, questioning legality of the sale deed dated 6^th July 2011 executed by defendants No.1 to 4 in favour of defendant No.5.

¶20

Such prayer moved by the present petitioners came to be rejected for amendment to the plaint, seeking the declaration vide impugned order dated October 8, 2015. As such, this petition.

¶21

The prayer for grant of amendment is opposed by the learned Counsel for defendants No.1 to 4 on the grounds that (a) suit is pending since 2008; (b) suit has trvelled at advanced stage as the cross-examination of parties is already over, and (c) plaintiffs were negligent and are trying to filling-in lacuna as mystery is noticed at the time of recoding of the cross-examination of the defendant.

¶22

Considered submissions. It is not in dispute that the suit property is purchased by defendant No.5 during pendency of the suit, and based on such sale deed he is added as party to the suit.

¶23

3 WP 1546-2016

¶24

The very intention of adding defendant No.5 as a party to the suit is required to be appreciated, particularly, in the backdrop of prayer for declaration of sale deed as null and void, which aspect is lost sight by the learned Trial Court.

¶25

No doubt, learned Counsel for respondents No.2 to 4 was right in pointing out that the present petitioners were negligent as they had taken such prayer at belated stage. However, by taking out such prayer at belated stage, it cannot be inferred from the record that respondents/defendants are taken by surprise.

¶26

In the aforesaid backdrop, it will be appropriate, in my opinion, to set aside the impugned order dated 8^th October 2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Udgir, below Exh. 42.

¶27

It is ordered that the amendment application Exh. 42 stands allowed, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen thousand only), within period of four weeks from today, with the Trial Court, to which respondents No.2 to 4 will be entitled.

¶28

The Writ Petition stands allowed in above terms.

¶29

pjm

Padminbai Manikrao Anargatte Deceased through L Rs Shaliwan Manikrao Anargatte and Others v. Manikrao Gangaram Anargatte and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Padminbai Manikrao Anargatte Deceased through L Rs Shaliwan Manikrao Anargatte and Others v. Manikrao Gangaram Anargatte and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jijabai Rama Bhuktar Vs Rama Sambhaji Khillare and Ors.

Rajkumar Manikrao Ghogre and Another Vs Indubai Bhagwat Gurme and Others

Rashidbi Latif Deshpande through Gpa Raheman Abdul Latif Deshpande Vs Paldhi Khurd Gram Panchayat Paldhi Khurd and Others

Dnyaneshwar Sudamrao Tanpure Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Purnachand Ramcharan Tank Vs Vikas Ratanlal Jain and Another

Fakruddin Moinuddin Siddiqui Vs Yantriki Vibhag Karmachari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd. and Ors.