Disposed

Prakash Kadaji Konale through Gpa Phulabai Babruwan Bhosale v. Madhav Gangaram Bajulge and Others

Bombay HC7 Oct 2024WP/1786/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Execution decree delivery of land where judgment debtor had standing crop; Executing Court ordered repossession to judgment debtor. High Court, petitioner having deposited crop value, quashed the impugned order and directed the ascertained crop value be paid to the judgment debtor and balance refunded.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 31.1.2025 quashed; ascertained crop value paid to judgment debtor; balance refunded to petitioner.

Prakash Kadaji Konale through Gpa Phulabai Babruwan… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:24322

¶2

WP 1786/15

¶3

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

111 WRIT PETITION NO. 1786 OF 2015

¶6

PRAKASH KADAJI KONALE THROUGH GPA PHULABAI BABRUWAN BHOSALE VERSUS MADHAV GANGARAM BAJULGE AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Kale Mahesh P. Advocate for Respondents 3/1 : Mr. R.K. Ashtekar Advocate for Respondent 5 : Mr. B.A. Shinde

¶8

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. Dated : October 07, 2024

¶9

PER COURT :-

¶10

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

It appears that decree was executed in it’s entirety. Thereafter an application came to be moved by the judgment debtor, seeking repossession of the land as they had standing crop on the said land. Although the land was given to decree holder in execution of the decree, it appears that judgment debtor had standing cultivated crop on land at the time of delivery and thereafter, by virtue of the impugned order, the land was directed to be handed over to the judgment debtor due to the standing crop on the land. It was submitted that the procedure is not followed in handing over the possession to the decree holder. It is observed in the impugned order that when standing crop was on the land, the possession ought not have been given to the decree holder. It is also observed in the impugned order that when there was standing crop, the bailiff ought to have reported the same to the Court. This Court stayed the impugned order in the present writ petition subject to depositing total amount of value of the crop.

¶12

The petitioner has deposited Rs.1,11,000/- before the Executing

¶13

WP 1786/15

¶14

¶15

Court. By virtue of order passed by this Court dated 20.2.2015, petitioner has again deposited amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- before the Executing Court in Regular Darkhast No. 40/2013. In view of the above the Executing Court was asked to ascertain the actual value of the standing crop and the report of the Assistant Superintendent which is filed on record indicates the value of the crop. The said amount as noted in the above report be given to judgment debtor. The balance amount be refunded to the petitioner. The impugned order dated 31.1.2025 in R.D. No. 40/2013 is quashed and set aside with above directions. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶16

( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. )

¶17

ssc/

Prakash Kadaji Konale through Gpa Phulabai Babruwan Bhosale v. Madhav Gangaram Bajulge and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash Kadaji Konale through Gpa Phulabai Babruwan Bhosale v. Madhav Gangaram Bajulge and Others

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

Jayshri Deepak Patil and Others Vs Yashwantrao Manikrao Patil and Others

Balasaheb Punjaji Jagtap Vs Varsha Balasaheb Jagtap

Sanjay Kishanrao Nade and Ors. Vs Jayshri Deepak Patil and Others

Chandraprakash Nandlal Bhansali Vs Santosh Kundlik Dugle through Gpa Kalyan Kundlik Dugleand Others

Bura Nagar Grampanchayat through Its Sarpanch Vs Arjun Kisan Bhagat Died through Lrs Vijay Arjun Bhagat and Others

Suresh Bajirao Pawar Vs Ashok Bhaskar More and Others