Munna R. Purthalppa v. Ramesh Harilal Mehta and 3 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
The Coram granted clarification to an order dismissing a portion of an earlier judgment where the lower judge erroneously directed payment of disputed maintenance dues to a non-party. The Court clarified that only the amounts agreed in the consent terms between the suit parties, excluding disputed claims by the society, should be released.
What did the court decide?
Clarified that only Rs.40,00,000/- agreed in consent terms is to be paid to Respondent No.3, excluding disputed claims mentioned in the subordinate order.
What the court decided
Digitally signed by LAXMIKANT LAXMIKANT GOPAL GOPAL CHANDAN CHANDAN Date: 2024.03.06 13:35:41 +0530
1 (9) IA-387.24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.387 OF 2024 IN APPEAL (L) NO.217 OF 2024 (APPEAL NO.25 OF 2024)
IN
SUIT NO.1044 OF 2007 WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1842 OF 2023
Munna R. Puthalappa : Applicant.
In the matter of
Munna R. Puthalappa : Appellant/Original Plaintiff. Vs. Ramesh Harilal Mehta and ors. : Respondents.
Mr. Vipul J. Shah for the Applicant/Appellant. Mr. Amit Tungare for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Deval Anja for Respondent No.3.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether this Court can clarify an order by deemed omission of a paragraph under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure to correct a misreading by the lower court.
Whether amounts claimed by a non-party respondent for maintenance can be directed to be paid from funds released under consent terms between the suit parties.
The correct scope of the order dated 16th January 2024 regarding payment of maintenance charges to Respondent No.3.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Munna R. Puthalappa
- respondent
Ramesh Harilal Mehta and ors.
Coram
DEVEN德拉 KUMAR UPADHYAYA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court