1. Nanasaheb Pandurang Kothavale and Ors. v. 1. Ramesh Uttam Mane and Anr.

Bombay HC20 Feb 2024SA/90/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeals against decrees for specific performance admitted on four substantial questions of law concerning subsistence of the contract and effect of repudiation. Execution and operation of the impugned judgments and decrees stayed during pendency; appellants barred from creating third-party interests or parting with possession.

What did the court decide?

Second appeals admitted on framed questions of law; execution and operation of impugned decrees stayed during pendency; appellants restrained from creating third-party interests or parting with posses

1. Nanasaheb Pandurang Kothavale and Ors. vs 1. Ramesh… — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

904.90.24 SA.docx

¶2

Iresh

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

SECOND APPEAL NO. 90 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 11357 OF 2024 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 90 OF 2024

¶5

Nanasaheb Pandurang Kothavale and Ors .....Appellants

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Ramesh Uttam Mane and anr .....Respondents

¶8

IRESH MASHAL

¶9

Digitally signed by IRESH MASHAL Date: 2024.09.09 12:44:53 +0530

¶10

WITH SECOND APPEAL NO. 238 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7945 OF 2024 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 238 OF 2024

¶11

Nanasaheb Pandurang Kothavale and Ors .....Appellants

¶12

Vs.

¶13

Shankar Dada Mane and anr

¶14

.....Respondents

¶15

Mr. Anilkumar Patil a/w Ms. Zeel Jain a/w Mr. Rahul Arote for the appellants

¶16

Mr. Chetan R. Nagane for respondent nos. 1 and 2

¶17

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J.

¶18

DATE : 5^th SEPTEMBER 2024

1/4

904.90.24 SA.docx

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the parties. The second appeals are admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

¶23

I. Whether the plaintiff was entitled for specific performance of the contract in the absence of any prayer for declaration of subsistence of the contract?

¶24

II. Whether in view of the defendants’ notice intimating the repudiation of the contract and return of the earnest amount, plaintiff would be entitled for specific performance without challenging the repudiation?

¶25

III. Whether both the Courts erred in not recording a specific finding on subsistence of the contract before granting the specific performance?

¶26

IV. Whether in view of legal principles settled by the Apex Court in the case of I. S. Sikandar (Dead) by LRs Vs. K. Subramani and Others¹ , the plaintiff was entitled for specific performance of the contract?

¶27

1 (2013) 15 Supreme Court Cases 27

¶28

2/4

¶29

904.90.24 SA.docx

¶30

Mr. Chetan Nagane waives service for the respondents.

¶31

Call for record and proceedings. Printing is dispensed with.

¶32

Learned advocate for the appellant shall file private paper-book within a period of one year.

¶33

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 11357 OF 2024 AND INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7945 OF 2024:

¶34

These applications are for seeking stay to the execution and operation of the impugned Judgment and Decree granting specific performance. Second appeals are admitted on the questions of law as framed in the order admitting second appeals. Since the decree is for specific performance of the contract and handing over possession, execution and operation of the decree is required to be stayed during the pendency of the second appeals.

¶35

Hence, during the pendency of the second appeals, there will be

¶36

interim stay in terms of prayer clause (b) in both applications.

¶37

During the pendency of the second appeals, appellants shall not

¶38

create any third party interest or part with possession of the suit property.

¶39

3/4

¶40

904.90.24 SA.docx

¶41

Applications are allowed in above terms.

¶42

[GAURI GODSE, J.]

¶43

4/4

1. Nanasaheb Pandurang Kothavale and Ors. v. 1. Ramesh Uttam Mane and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

1. Nanasaheb Pandurang Kothavale and Ors. v. 1. Ramesh Uttam Mane and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vasantdada Patil Pratisthan Trust Mumbai and Ors. Vs Nandkumar M Katkar and Anr.

Nisar Ismail Waghoo Vs Mazgaon Kokani Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. and Ors.

Shraddha Shahoo Gaikwad and Anr. Vs the Divisional Joint Registrar Co. Op Soc and Ors.

Rayat Shikshan Sanstha Vs Sau. Kamal Dattatrya Javir and Anr.

Rajesh Kashinath Gupta and Anr. Vs Kashinath Rajaram Gupta and Ors.

Tukaram Sakharam Utekar and Ors. Vs Keshav Sakharam Utekar and Ors.