Dismissed

Mr. Shantaram Baburao Malusare v. Mr. Shankar Dadu Malusare and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Sept 2019WP/13649/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single Judge bench of the Bombay High Court dismissed a Writ Petition challenging an order rejecting an application to set aside a compromise. The petitioner agreed to abide by the compromise but objected to the partition plan. The Court held the petitioner could approach the Executing Court separately while rejecting the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition rejected with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Executing Court regarding the partition plan.

Mr. Shantaram Baburao Malusare Vs Mr. Shankar Dadu… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

wp 13649.18.doc

¶2

Urmila Ingale

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

 WRIT PETITION NO. 13649 OF 2018

¶6

Mr.Shantaram Baburao Malusare .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Mr.Shankar Dadu Malusare and ors. .. Respondents

¶9

Mr.Satheesh K.R. for the Petitioner.

¶10

CORAM : M.S.KARNIK, J.

¶11

 DATE : 26th SEPTEMBER 2019

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

¶14

2.The order impugned is dated 25/07/2017 passed by

¶15

the Executing Court rejecting the application filed by the
petitioner for setting aside the compromise dated 19/08/2001

¶16

recorded in Regular Civil Suit No. 3 of 1997 below Exhibit 63.
The petitioner also challenges order passed by the Appellate
Court holding that Misc. Civil Appeal against the Executing
Courts order dated 25/07/2007 is not tenable.

¶17

1/2

¶18

wp 13649.18.doc

¶19

3.After the matter was argued for some time, learned
Counsel for the petitioner on instructions submits that the
petitioner is willing to abide by the compromise dated
19/08/2001. His grievance however is that in terms of the
compromise the survey that is carried out and the plan for
partition prepared by T.I.L.R. is not in consonance with the
compromise terms. He has objection to the plan for partition
which is prepared. If the petitioner has any grievance regarding
the plan prepared by T.I.L.R. as not in conformity with the terms
of the compromise, the petitioners are always at liberty to make
an appropriate application to the Executing Court which
application can be considered by Executing Court on its own
merits.

¶20

4.With these observations & with liberty to the

¶21

petitioner to make an appropriate application, Petition is
rejected.

¶22

Digitally signed Urmila by Urmila P. Ingle P. Ingle Date: 2019.09.2618:45:22 +0530

¶23

2/2

Mr. Shantaram Baburao Malusare v. Mr. Shankar Dadu Malusare and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Shantaram Baburao Malusare v. Mr. Shankar Dadu Malusare 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

Ganpat Hariba More Vs Balasaheb Janardhan Jagtap

Mrs. Sonia Rajpal Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra through Public Prosecutor and Ors.

Shri. Popat Sakharam Nikam and Ors. Vs Shri. Bhagwan Hari Nikam and Ors.

Taradas Shivram Vatkar Decd Thru Lr Vs Dhondiram Dadu Gawali Decd Thru Lr and Anr.

Shri. Sachin Dnyanoba Wakadkar and Anr. Vs Shri. Dnyanoba Vithoba Wakadkar and Ors.

Rambhau Dattaram Malankar Vs Vijay Vasanji Adsani and Ors.