Disposed¶19

Smt. Parmadevi W/O Omprakash Khemani Thr. P.O.A. Omprakash Mahabir Prasad Khemani v. Journalists Cooperative Housing Soc. Ltd., Nagpur through Secretary and Another

Bombay HC21 Jan 2025CAW/154/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Enforcement of consent decree through executing Court; direction to execute sale deed not granted by High Court; Dispute No.286/1995 decreed by consent order dated 13.06.2022 in Writ Petition No.1799 of 2017; Rs.25 lakhs payable by petitioner; conveyance of flat on as is where is basis; delivery of possession within two weeks of payment; co-operative housing society flat conveyance; applicant directed to executing Court; Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench; CAW-154-2025; Anil L. Pansare, J.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the parties to approach the executing Court for redressal of their grievance. ¶19

Smt. Parmadevi W/O Omprakash Khemani Thr. P.O.A. Omprakash Mahabir Prasad Khemani Vs Journalists Cooperative Housing Soc. Ltd., Nagpur through Secretary and Another — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

4 CAW-154-2025

2025:BHC-NAG:628

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION (W) NO.154 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1799 OF 2017 (D)

¶6

[Parmadevi Omprakash Khemani ..vs.. Journalist’s Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and Anr.]

¶7

__________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

¶8

appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.

¶9

Mr A. C. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr V. A. Dhabe, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

¶10

CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE, J. DATE : 21st JANUARY, 2025.

¶11

Vide order dated 13.06.2022 passed in Writ Petition No.1799 of 2017, this Court was pleased to pass following order.

¶12

“ i) By consent of the parties, the dispute No.286/1995 is decreed.

¶13

ii) The petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs.25 lakhs within a period of one months from today.

¶14

iii) Respondent nos.1 and 2 shall execute necessary conveyance in favour of the disputant on payment of Rs.25 lakhs to the respondent no.2. It is made clear that conveyance of the flat in question shall be on as is where is basis.

¶15

iv) On payment of Rs.25 lakhs, the respondent nos.1 and 2 shall execute necessary conveyance and shall also deliver possession of the said flat within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the payment. ”

¶16

As could be seen, the dispute No.286 of 1995 has been decreed in terms of compromise that has been arrived at by and between the parties. The applicant is seeking direction to the non-applicants to take steps to execute sale deed in terms of the decree. The applicant ought to have approached the executing Court to get the sale deed executed.

¶17

4 CAW-154-2025

¶18

¶19

With the above observation, the application is disposed of with liberty to the parties to approach the executing Court for redressal of their grievance.

¶20

JUDGE

¶21

TAMBE

Smt. Parmadevi W/O Omprakash Khemani Thr. P.O.A. Omprakash Mahabir Prasad Khemani v. Journalists Cooperative Housing Soc. Ltd., Nagpur through Secretary and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Parmadevi W/O Omprakash Khemani Thr. P.O.A. Omprakash Mahabir Prasad Khemani v. Journalists Cooperative Housing Soc. Ltd., Nagpur through Secretary and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Womens Education Society, Nagpur Thr. Its Secretary Vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-Ii, Employees Provident Funds Org., Nagpur

Womens Education Society, Nagpur Thr. Its Secretary Vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-Ii, Employees Provident Funds Org., Nagpur

Prakash S/O Kisanlal Soni (Dead), Thr. Lrs. Vs Riyaz Ahemad Mohd. Yusuf Khan and Others

Gautam Shriram Kamble Vs State of Maharashtra, Ministry of Revenue, Thr. Its Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Akshay S/O Sudhakar Paighan vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati and Others

Rohit Sanjay Goyal vs Madhuri Rohit Goyal