Lsp v. Madhavrao Maruti Bhapkar D/H
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
All the applications are allowed in terms of above
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. All the applications are allowed in terms of above directions.
Judgment
Mr. Anturkar with Mr. Deshmukh appears respondent nos. 1 9 Mr. Tajane appears respondent no.
By impugned decree First Appeal No. 197/2009, dismissing applicant’s Suit (Special Civil Suit No.91/2003), counter defendants allowed thereby directing partition property 2 further direction possession the undivided share of the suit property to defendant no.9.
Undoubtedly, the applicants are in possession of entire property now. The property a admeasuring 4200 sq. building construction (residential bungalow) admeasuring 1400 sq. standing plot. Defendant Nos. 1 to 9 claimed half share of the suit property.
Mr. Anturkar has placed before us the Valuer’s Certificate 03/03/2009. The property located Lane No. 2, Subhashnagar, Shukrawar Peth area and the entire property has been valued at Rs. 1 Crore by the valuer.
After having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties appropriate profit Rs.12,500/- property continue possession applicants entire property, directed amount Rs.12,500/- profit. The amount deposited i.e. Court remittances quarter Rs.37,500/- w.e.f. 01/01/2009. So 3 arrears towards profit September 2007 December 2008 concerned, applicant furnish Bank guarantee Court renewed during pendency appeal. w.e.f. The amount deposited towards profit 01/01/2009 invested Court deposit a nationalised Bank deposit renewed during pendency appeal. None parties creating interest property thereof during pendency appeal. In addition, decree passed in favour of the respondents-defendants 1 to 9 shall stand stayed during the pendency of the appeal.
Operative part
All the applications are allowed in terms of above directions.
Should there by any default in complying with the above directions by any of the parties, liberty to the other to approach this Court for appropriate relief. K.DESHPANDE, J) (RAVI K.DESHPANDE, J) (RAVI K.DESHPANDE, J) (RAVI (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)
(B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: All the applications are allowed in terms of above
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 03 Mar 2009. The bench was RAVI K DESHPANDE, K DESHPANDE, RAVI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.