Allowed

Vedprakash M Harkar Thru L.Rs.Alkabai and Ors. v. Somnath Udhavrao Wattamwar and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Nov 2021SA/282/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the second appeal on the basis of a comprehensive compromise arrived at between the appellants and respondents. The judgment and decree in the underlying suit and appeal were set aside, and the parties were directed to execute a compromise decree registered under the Maharashtra Amendment to Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act.

What did the court decide?

Second appeal disposed. Judgment and decree in Regular Civil Suit No.243 of 1980 and Regular Civil Appeal No.123 of 1987 set aside. Parties directed to execute compromise decree and send copy to Sub R

Vedprakash M Harkar Thru L.Rs.Alkabai and Ors. Vs Somnath… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

17-ca-10950-2021.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

17 SECOND APPEAL NO.282 OF 1999 WITH CA/10950/2021 IN SA/282/1999 WITH CA/1483/2001 IN SA/282/1999 WITH CA/1435/2021 IN SA/282/1999 WITH CA/7554/2018 IN SA/282/1999

¶4

VEDPRAKASH M HARKAR THRU L.RS.ALKABAI DIED THROUGH LRS. DEEPAK VEDPRASKH HARKAR AND ORS VERSUS

¶5

SOMNATH UDHAVRAO WATTAMWAR AND ORS

¶6

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Suryawanshi D. N. & Mr. Suryawanshi P. D. Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. M. S. Deshmukh Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. D. G. Nagode AGP for respondent Nos.4 to 6 : Mr. A. M. Phule

¶7

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. DATE : 22.11.2021

¶8

ORDER :-

¶9

. Parties have entered into compromise. It will not be out of place to mention here that there was already a partial compromise that was granted by this Court by order dated 07.01.2019. It was between the appellants and present respondent Nos.2 and 3. However, at that time, there was no compromise between respondent No.1 and the appellants. Now, even that compromise has taken place. The verification of the compromise has been got done through learned Registrar (Judicial). It has been stated that there was no pressure or coercion for any of the

¶10

(1)

¶11

17-ca-10950-2021.odt

¶12

parties to enter into compromise. It appears that there was technical lacuna as regards the legal representatives of respondent No.2. That application is already allowed, however, the amendment has not been carried out and, therefore, learned Advocate for the appellants to carry out that amendment immediately.

¶13

The learned Advocate for the appellants submits that though earlier there was compromise between appellants and respondent Nos.2 and 3, which was recorded by this Court on 07.01.2019, now the terms have varied and in the present compromise terms everything is included and, therefore, he is not pressing for decree in terms of compromise recorded by this Court on 07.01.2019. Therefore, taking into consideration the compromise that has taken place between the appellants and respondents, the second appeal stands disposed of in terms of compromise Exhibit-‘B’. However, the fact remains is that certain parties are relinquishing their rights and lakhs of rupees are agreed to be transferred. Therefore, in view of Maharashtra Amendment to Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act, the consent decree deserves to be registered taking into consideration the decision to be taken by the appropriate authority under the Act. Therefore, the copy of the consent decree has to be given to the concerned authority. In view of the same, following order is passed :-

(2)

17-ca-10950-2021.odt

ORDER

I) The Second Appeal stands disposed of in view of compromise arrived at between the parties, which is marked at Exhibit-‘B’.

¶18

II) The judgment and decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No.243 of 1980 by learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Beed on 08.01.1987 and judgment and order passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.123 of 1987 by learned 2^nd Additional District Judge, Ambajogai on 12.02.1998 are hereby set aside. Regular Civil Suit No.243 of 1980 stands disposed of in terms of compromise Exhibit-‘B’.

¶19

III) Copy of the compromise decree be sent to Sub Registrar, Kaij having jurisdiction over the lands situated at Kaij for action to be taken, if any.

¶20

IV) Decree be drawn accordingly.

¶21

V) Civil Application Nos.10950 of 2021, 1483 of 2001, 1435 of 2021 and 7554 of 2018 stand disposed of.

¶22

[SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.]

¶23

scm

¶24

(3)

Vedprakash M Harkar Thru L.Rs.Alkabai and Ors. v. Somnath Udhavrao Wattamwar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vedprakash M Harkar Thru L.Rs.Alkabai and Ors. v. Somnath Udhavrao Wattamwar 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

Uttam Shripati Bhade Deceased Laxmibai Uttam Bhade and Others Vs Bhimabai Sampat Jadhav and Others

Uttam Shripati Bhade Deceased Laxmibai Uttam Bhade and Others Vs Bhimabai Sampat Jadhav and Others

Wajid Khuddus Kazi and Anr. Vs Abdul Rauf Banemiya Kazi

Suresh Gangadhar Dhaptkar Deceased Lrs. Sunita and Others Vs Guruprasad Changdeo Dhapakar

Suresh Gangadhar Dhaptkar Deceased Lrs. Sunita and Others Vs Guruprasad Changdeo Dhapakar

Laxmi Vishnu Pawar Vs Premanand Kishanrao Yangad died through Lrs. Abhijit Pramanand Yangad and Others