Raghu Maruti Thorat Deceased Thr Lrs and Anr. v. Joti Krishna Thorat Deceased

Bombay HC12 Jul 2024IA/2117/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeal admitted on three substantial questions of law concerning whether a gift deed lacking any description of the area gifted could support findings of ownership and a decree for removal of encroachment by the first appellate court. Record called for; appellant to file private paper-book within one year.

What did the court decide?

Appeal admitted; ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) till next date.

Raghu Maruti Thorat Deceased Thr Lrs and Anr. vs Joti… — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Iresh

¶2

27.154.24 sa.docx

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

SECOND APPEAL NO. 154 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2117 OF 2024 IN

¶6

SECOND APPEAL NO. 154 OF 2024

¶7

Raghu Maruti Thorat Deceased .....Appellant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Joti Krishna Thorat Deceased

¶10

.....Respondent

¶11

Mr. Kayval P. Shah for appellant

¶12

Mr. Pranav Dessai a/w Mr. Kiran Padalkar and Ashwini Padalkar i/b Padaklkar and Partners for respondents

¶13

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J.

¶14

DATE : 12^th JULY 2024

¶15

ORDER:

¶16

Heard. Second appeal is admitted on the following substantial

¶17

questions of law:

¶18

(i) Whether the suit for removal of encroachment could have

¶19

Digitally signed by IRESH IRESH MASHAL MASHAL Date: 2024.07.16 12:18:47 +0530

¶20

1/3

¶21

27.154.24 sa.docx

¶22

been decreed by the first Appellate Court by ignoring material factual aspect that the gift relied upon by the plaintiff as a source of title did not provide for any area of the property?

¶23

(ii) Whether the findings of facts recorded by the first Appellate Court regarding ownership of the plaintiff on the suit property i.e. encroached area based on the gift deed which did not contain the area could have been accepted on the basis of oral evidence on record?

¶24

(iii) Whether reversal of findings of facts on record, more particularly the fact that the gift deed did not contain the actual area gifted is sustainable ?

¶25

Mr. Pranav Dessai waives service for respondents.

¶26

Call for record and proceedings.

¶27

Printing is dispensed with.

¶28

Appellant to file private paper-book within a period of one year.

¶29

2/3

¶30

27.154.24 sa.docx

¶31

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2117 OF 2024:

¶32

Rule on interim in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c) is made returnable on 27^th September 2024

¶33

Mr. Pranav Dessai waives service for respondents.

¶34

Till next date there will be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶35

[GAURI GODSE, J.]

¶36

3/3

Raghu Maruti Thorat Deceased Thr Lrs and Anr. v. Joti Krishna Thorat Deceased

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghu Maruti Thorat Deceased Thr Lrs and Anr. v. Joti Krishna Thorat Deceased

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kamalakant Shivram Malandkar (Since Deceased) vs Rekha Krishna Acharekar

Utkarsh Goraknath Baile vs Sandhya Utkarsh Baile

Mr. Mubarak Ali Mohammed Sidique Shaikh vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Another

Sandip Sadshiv Kamble (Mahar) vs Narhari Rambhau Dumbare (Since Deceased)

Tejas Dilip Barmecha and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra through Chief G.P.

Sulochana Narahari Kandale vs Avadhut Mahadev Jamadagni