Disposed

Ajit @ Ajaykumar Maruti Kadam (Deceased ) and Ors. v. Shubhash Keshav Patil and Ors.

Bombay HC1 Apr 2024WP/1519/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking extension of stay of the Appellate Court judgment dated 09.01.2024, which allowed the Defendants' appeal against an interim order favouring Plaintiffs in a specific performance suit based on a 1975 agreement. The Court stayed the impugned judgment and directed Respondents to file an affidavit-in-reply within four weeks; matter adjourned to 15 March 2024.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment dated 09.01.2024 stayed; Respondents directed to file Affidavit-in-Reply within four weeks, rejoinder within two weeks thereafter.

Ajit @ Ajaykumar Maruti Kadam (Deceased ) and Ors. vs… — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

P4.WPST.2113.2024.doc

¶2

HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.2113 OF 2024

¶6

Ajit @ Ajaykumar Maruti Kadam (since deceased) through Shakuntala Ajaykumar Kadam and Ors. .. Petitioners Versus Shubhash Keshav Patil and Ors. .. Respondents

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. Yuvaraj Gharal, Advocate for Petitioners.

¶9

Mr. Sandeep Koregave, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶10

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 09, 2024

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1. Mentioned. Not on Board. Taken on Board.

¶13

2. Heard Mr. Gharal, learned Advocate for Petitioners and Mr.

¶14

Koregave, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶15

3. Perused the praecipe dated 09.02.2024 and the copy of Writ

¶16

Petition.

¶17

4. Mr. Gharal, learned Advocate appears for the Petitioners in the present case. Praecipe is filed seeking extension of time of the stay granted by the learned Appellate Court in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.22 of 2022. Appeal of Defendants has been allowed against the order dated 18.11.2021 passed below Exhibit-5. The order dated 18.11.2021 was passed in favour of Plaintiffs. It is seen that the Plaintiffs have filed receipts rather some receipts which clearly show

¶18

1 of 3

¶19

P4.WPST.2113.2024.doc

¶20

the number of suit property for the year 2020 before the learned Trial Court as also the Appellate Court which have been duly taken cognizance of. Date of the receipts is subsequent to the filing of the suit proceedings. That apart, Plaintiffs have also filed several receipts which do not reflect number of the suit property.

¶21

5. Be that as it may, once Plaintiffs have prima facie, proved before the learned Trial Court that Plaintiffs are in possession of the property of which they are seeking specific performance in respect of the registered Agreement of the year 1975, the learned Trial Court has appreciated the same and passed order dated 18.11.2021. The learned Appellate Court while addressing the issue of possession in paragraph No.20 of the judgment dated 09.01.2024, at page No.84 of the Writ Petition has incidentally considered the aforementioned facts and noted the same. It is probably in that context that learned Appellate Court itself while passing judgment dated 09.1.2024 stayed its own order to permit the Plaintiffs to take appropriate remedy. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

¶22

6. Mr. Koregave appears on notice for the Respondents. He would argue that according to his instructions Defendants are in possession of the property. If that be the case it shall be open to the Defendants to show the same if so desired by filing an appropriate response to the Writ Petition. From the above mentioned reasons

¶23

2 of 3

¶24

P4.WPST.2113.2024.doc

¶25

prima facie, it is seen that Plaintiffs are in possession of the suit property.

¶26

7. Mr. Gharal would submit that there are standing sugarcane crops which are harvested by the Plaintiffs. In that view of the matter, the impugned judgment dated 09.01.2024 shall stand stayed. The Respondents i.e. Defendants are directed to file Affidavit-in-Reply by placing on record of such relevant material. Such Affidavit-in-Reply shall be filed within a period of four weeks from today. Rejoinder, if any, to be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶27

8. Stand over to 15^th March, 2024 .

¶28

H. H. SAWANT

¶29

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

¶30

Digitally signed by HARSHADA HARSHADA HANUMANT HANUMANTSAWANT SAWANT Date: 2024.02.09 16:52:51 +0530

¶31

3 of 3

Ajit @ Ajaykumar Maruti Kadam (Deceased ) and Ors. v. Shubhash Keshav Patil and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit @ Ajaykumar Maruti Kadam (Deceased ) and Ors. v. Shubhash Keshav Patil 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Bhikabai P. Patil (Pawar) Vs Shri. Bali Pandu Patil (Decd.) Throug Heirs and Lrs and Ors.

Smt. Namabai Laxu Nikam and Others Vs Smt. Pushpa Subrao Mohite and Others

Naghnath Manohar Gaikwad vs Niyojit Shri Vinoba Bhave Smrut Sahakari Grahnirman Sanstha

Bhushan Vishnu Satpute vs Supriya Bhushan Satpute and Ors.

Parvez Ali and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mandabai @ Mandubai Kubir @ Kabir Munje vs Madhukar Laxman Munje Deceased through Legal Heir