Bombay High Court
Surajprasad Badriprasad Tiwari vs Arunkumar Laxmanprasad Tiwari & ... on 20 October, 2016
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 sa302.93.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
SECOND APPEAL NO. 302 OF 1993
Surajprasad Badriprasad Tiwari
1] Mrs. Premlata Girijashankar Trivedi,
aged 62 years, Occ. Housewife,
R/o. Gram Panhanda, Tah.Balodabazar,
Distt. Raipur (M.P.)
2]
Smt. Pushpa wd/o Chandrashekar Mishra,
aged 58 years, Occ. Proprietor of Cycle Stand
R/o. Rajaram Ka Bada, Mishra Cycle Stand,
Near Railway Station, Raipur
3] Ramesh Sarjooprasad Tiwari,
aged 54 years, Occ. Business,
R/o. Rajesh Kirana Stores,
Bhagatsingh Chowk, Pulgaon,
Distt. Wardha (M.S.)
4] Mrs. Ratna Narayanprasad Shukla,
aged 50 years, R/o. House No.7-23/28,
Street No.8, Jai Santoshi Nagar,
Habsiguda, Hyderabad (A.P.)
5] Mrs. Jyotsna Prakash Thakur,
aged 48 years, R/o. Blaze Aprtment,
Near State Bank, Gokhale Road,
Navpada, Thane,
6] Mrs. Naina Kamal Sukla,
MIG Colony, Flat No. 5/4,
aged 46 years, Occ. Doctor,
R/o. Type-A, Medical College Square,
Nagpur.
7] Rajesh Sarjooprasad Tiwari,
aged 44 years, Occ. Business,
2 sa302.93.odt
R/o. Mishra Cycle Stand,
Rajaram Ka Bada, Near Railway
Station, Raipur (M.)......... APPELLANTS
...VERSUS...
1] Arun Kumar s/o Laxmanprasad Tiwari,
aged 40 years, Occ. Service, presently
R/o. Ward No. 14, Pulgaon, Tah. Deoli,
Distt. Wardha.
2] Gayaprasad S/o. Shivramprasad Tiwari
through
2A]
Smt. Shila wd/o Gayaprasad Tiwari,
R/o. Gandhi Chowk, Pulgaon,
Distt. Wardha.
2B] Lalitkumar s/o. Gayaprasad Tiwari,
R/o. Gandhi Chowk, Pulgaon,
Distt. Wardha.
2C] Sushilkumar s/o Gayaprasad Tiwari,
R/o. Gandhi Chowk, Pulgaon,
Distt. Wardha.
2D] Pradeepkumar S/o Gayaprasad Tiwari,
R/o. Gandhi Chowk, Pulgaon,
Distt. Wardha.
2E] Mrs.Anuradha Jitendra Pande,
R/o. Pandey Bhavan, Rukhmini
Nagar, Amravati, Distt. Amravati.
3] Omkarprasad Laxmanprasad Tiwari
(deleted)
4] Hanumanprasad Badriparasad Tiwari,
through
4A] Smt. Radhabai Hanumanprasad Tiwari,
aged 75, Occ. Household, R/o Ward No.16
Gandhi Chowk, Pulgaon,
3 sa302.93.odt
Distt. Wardha.
4B] Ashokumar Hanumanprasad Tiwari,
Aged Major, Occ. Business,
R/o Ward No.16, Gandhi Chowk, Pulgaon,
Tah. Deoli, Distt. Wardha.
4C] Sureshkumar Hanumanprasad Tiwari,
aged 53 years, Occ. Business,
R/o Ward No.16, Gandhi Chowk, Pulgaon,
Tah. Deoli, Distt. Wardha.
4D] Sharadkumar Hanumanprasad Tiwari,
aged 51 years, Occ. Business,
R/o. Jawahar Colony, Nachangaon (Pulgaon)
4E] Satiskumar Hanumanprasad Tiwari,
aged about 49 years, Occ. Cultivator,
R/o Ward No.16, Gandhi Chowk, Pulgaon,
Tah. Deoli, Distt. Wardha.
4F] Dilipkumar Hanumanprasad Tiwari,
aged 47 years, Occ. Business,
R/o Ward No.16, Gandhi Chowk, Pulgaon,
Tah. Deoli, Distt. Wardha.
4G] Dineshkumar Hanumanprasad Tiwari,
aged about 40 years, Occ. Business and
Cultivation, R/o Ward No.16, Gandhi Chowk,
Pulgaon, Tah. Deoli, Distt. Wardha.
5] Ganeshprasad Ramprasad Tiwari,
R/o. Central Jail, Amravati,
Tah. And Distt. Amravati.
6] Rochaldas Motiram Ahuja,
aged about 29 yeas, Occ. Kirana Shopkeeper,
R/o. Mill Road, Pulgaon,
Tah. Deoli, Distt. Wardha
7] Hemandas Motiram Ahuja,
R/o.Sindhi Colony, Hinganghat,
Tah. Hinganghat, Distt. Wardha.
4 sa302.93.odt
8] Gulabdas Motiram Ahuja,
aged about 21 years, Occ. Kirana Shopkeeper,
R/o. Mill Road, Pulgaon,
Tah. Deoli, Distt.Wardha
9] Surabai Motiram Ahuja,
@ Smt. Suribai Parashram Chawala.
Chakkapara, Near Post Office,
Bilaspur (Chattisgarh.)
10] Paribai Motiram Ahuja,
@ Paribai Kailashchandra Balwani, R
R/o. Poddar Garden, Behind Sant
Kawarnath Dharmashala,
Wardha, Tq. And Distt. Wardha.
11] Parasram Motiram Ahuja,
aged about 9 years,
12] Dilip Kumar Motiram Ahuja,
aged about 6 years,
13] Kisanibai Motiram Ahuja
(deleted)
14] Ramprakash Motandas Arora,
aged about 30 years, Occ. Cloth Merchant,
R/o. Pulgaon, Distt. Wardha.
15] Zamatmal Khanchandji Ahuja
through
15a] Smt. Lilabai Zamatmal Ahuja,
aged about 54 years, Occ. Household work
15b] Manohar Zamatmal Ahuja,
aged 32 years, Occ. Panthela,
15c] Harish Zamatmal Ahuja,
aged 30 years, Occ. Panthela,
All R/o. Ward No. 16, Pulgaon,
5 sa302.93.odt
Tah. Deoli, Distt. Wardha.
15d] Sau. Lajwanti Ghanshyamdas Dudhani,
aged 28 years, Occ. Household work
R/o. Barac No.259, Room No.5,
Ulhasnagar-1, Bombay.
15e] Sau. Ashadevi Jawaharlal Khatwani,
aged 26 years, Occ. Household work,
R/o. Vilki Tailors, Khadan Camp,
Akola.
15f] Sau. Meena Harishkumar Atlani,
aged 24 years, Occ. Household work,
C/o. Shri Lalchand Sundarmal Atlani,
Kumar Nagar, F-58, Dhule.
15g] Ku.Shanti Zamatmal Ahuja
@ Mrs. Shanti Arjundas Pinjwani,
aged about 25 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. Rigal Radio, Near Regal Talkies,
Akola, Tah. & Distt. Akola....... RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Anjan De, counsel for appellant
Shri M.R.Joharapurkar, counsel for R-2(A) to 2(D)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, J.
th
DATE : 20 OCTOBER, 2016 .
ORAL JUDGMENT
1] This appeal was admitted on 21.10.1993 on the
substantial question of law as regards, whether the suit is
barred by limitation.
2] It is urged by the learned counsel for the
6 sa302.93.odt
respondents that all the controversies involved in the present
second appeal are covered by the decision of this Court
delivered on 17.07.2006 in Second Appeal No. 305 of 1993
and the decision given in Second Appeal No. 541 of 2007 on
06.10.2016.
3] Dr. Anjan De, the learned counsel appearing for
the appellant does not dispute that the substantial question of
law framed by this Court while admitting the matter stands
concluded by the said decisions. He has, however, urged
that one more point arises in this second appeal. According
to him, the sale certificate was in the name of Gayaprasad
Gourishankar and the person by such name was not in
existence, but it was Gayaaprasad Shivramprasad.
4] While disposing of the Second Appeal No. 541 of
2007, this Court has already taken into consideration the
findings recorded by the trial Court as well as by the lower
appellate Court. The lower appellate Court has held that the
contention regarding identity of Gayaprasad Tiwari as son of
Shivramprasad is not at all disputed. Apart from this, the
question raised purely involves adjudication on facts, which
7 sa302.93.odt
does not give rise to any substantial question of law. The
second appeal is dismissed.
JUDGE
Rvjalit
