Allowed

Munshi Zulfikar Ahmad v. Agnela U. J. De Oliveira and 6 Ors.

Bombay HC20 Jul 2021CA/3/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Goa allowed the appellant to withdraw the appeal and civil application with liberty to file further proceedings. The court directed the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously within one year, noting the parties are senior citizens, and ensured interlocutory observations would not prejudice the final merit-based decision.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to withdraw the appeal and civil application with liberty to file appropriate proceedings to protect rights, including seeking partition.

Munshi Zulfikar Ahmad Vs Agnela U. J. De Oliveira and 6 Ors. — Partition | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

26 AO 2 of 2021.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶3

APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.2 OF 2021

¶4

WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3 OF 2021 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.2 OF 2021

¶5

MUNSHI ZULFIKAR AHMAD

¶6

... Appellant / Applicant.

¶7

VS

¶8

ANGELA U.J. DE OLIVEIRA AND 6 ORS... Respondents.

¶9

Mr. Preetam Talaulikar, Advocatefor the Appellant / Applicant.
Ms. Asha Dessai, Advocate for Respondents No.1, 2, 3, and 5.

¶10

Coram:M.S. SONAK, J.
Date: 20th July 2021.

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1.Heard Mr. Talaulikar for the Appellant and Ms. Asha Dessai for
Respondents No.1, 2, 3, and 5.

¶13

2.After this matter was argued for some time, Mr. Talaulikar on
instructions seeks to leave to withdraw this appeal. He however submits
that it may be clarified that nothing in this order will prevent the
Appellant from taking out appropriate proceedings to protect his rights,
including, seeking partition, etc. Mr. Talaulikar also requests that it may
be clarified that the observations in the impugned order will not in any

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

20th July 2021

¶16

26 AO 2 of 2021.doc

¶17

manner prejudice the Appellant when it comes to the final disposal of the
suit on merits.

¶18

3.Mr. Talaulikar further requests that the Special Civil Suit No.
26/2019/B may itself be ordered to be expedited, since, the Appellant, as
well as Respondent No.1, are senior citizens.

¶19

4.According to me, leave can be granted to withdraw this appeal
with liberty as prayed for. The injunction order restricts the Appellant
from attempting to dispossess the Plaintiffs otherwise than by due process
of law. Therefore, if the Appellant wishes to adopt the due process of law,
there can obviously, be no bar for the same.

¶20

5.Similarly, it is only appropriate that the Trial Court does not allow
itself to be influenced by any of the observations in the impugned order
which is made at the interlocutory stage. The suit will have to be decided
on its own merits and in accord with law depending on the evidence that
the parties lead before the Trial Court.

¶21

6.Having regard to the peculiar circumstances of the present case and
the fact that some of the parties are senior citizens, the learned Trial Judge
is directed to dispose of this suit as expeditiously as possible and in any
case, within one year from the date, the parties filed authenticated copy of
this order. The learned Counsel for the parties assure this Court that they
will cooperate with the learned Trial Judge for the expeditious disposal of
the suit.

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

20th July 2021

¶24

26 AO 2 of 2021.doc

¶25

7. The parties / their Counsel to appear before the Trial Court on 02.08.2021 at 10:30 a.m. and file authenticated copy of this order. If necessary, the learned Trial Judge to prepone the date which is now stated to be in September of 2021 so that the directions for the expedition are complied with.

¶26

8. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs. All concerned to act based on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶27

9. Civil Application does not survive and the said is disposed of.

¶28

 M.S. SONAK, J.

¶29

jfd/-

¶30

Page 3 of 3 20th July 2021

Munshi Zulfikar Ahmad v. Agnela U. J. De Oliveira and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munshi Zulfikar Ahmad v. Agnela U. J. De Oliveira and 6 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

Prasanna Nagvekar Vs Advino Fernandes and 9 Ors.

Prabhu Constructions, Rep. by Its Prop., Venkatesh Narayan Prabhu Moni Vs Jitesh Jivaji Kamat and 4 Ors.

Kayji Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Thr. Its Aut. Officer, Chandrakumar R. Huilgol., Vs Vishwanath Raghuvir Caroikar @ Vishwanath Raghuvir Karekar and 3 Ors.

Munshi Zulfikar Ahmad Vs Angela U.J. De Oliveira and 6 Ors.

Sebastiao Fernandes, Thr. His Widow, Ana Coneicao Gracias.,., Vs Alex D'Costa and 4 Ors.

Benedito Costa (Dec) Thr. His Lrs and Anr., Vs Sebastiao Fernandes and 2 Ors.