Bombay High Court
Santosh Govind Kathole vs Vinayak Namdeo Kathole (Dead) ... on 19 January, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
Judgment
6393.14 13
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.6393 OF 2014
Santosh Govind Kathole,
Aged : 55 years, occupation : agriculturist,
R/o Shegaon, tahsil Shegaon, district Buldhana. ..... Petitioner.
:: V E R S U S ::
1. Vinayak Namdeo Kathole, Dead.
Aged : 78 years, occupation agriculturist,
R/o Shegaon, taluka Shegaon, district Buldhana.
LRs of respondent No.1
1(i) Jayant s/o Vinayak Kathole (son)
Aged : 64 years, occupation : retired.
1(ii) Vijay s/o Vinayak Kathole (son)
Aged : 57 years, occupation : service
(1)a & (1) B r/o Fule Nagar, Shegaon,
taluka Shegaon & District Buldhana.
1(iii) Sau.Shaila w/o Ramnbau,
Khodaskar (daughter)
Aged : 61 years, occupation household,
R/o Chatri - talav road,, SBI colony,
Dastur Nagar, Amravati.
Taluka district Amravati.
2. Shankar Namdeo Kathole,
Aged : 40 years, occupation agriculturist,
R/o Shegaon, taluka Shegaon, district Buldhana.
3. Shakuntala Namdeo Kathole,
(since dead, LRs were not brought on record by plaintiff)
.....2/-
::: Uploaded on - 21/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 08/02/2021 06:22:38 :::
Judgment
6393.14 13
2
4. Pramila Purshottam Jawarkar,
dead through LRs
4-A] Sanjay Purshottam Jawarkar,
Aged : 45, occupation : service, r/o
Bharat Nagar, in front of Laxami
Narayan institute, Amravati Road,
Nagpur, taluka and district Nagpur.
5. Kamal Ramrao Kshirsagar,
dead through Legal Heirs-
5-A] Dr. Anil Ramrao Kshirsagar,
Aged : 45 years, occupation : profession,
R/o Dongaon, taluka Mehekar,
District Buldhana.
5-B] Avinash Ramrao Kshirsagar,
Aged : 48, occupation : service,
R/o Sharda Nagar, Amravati,
Taluka & district Amravati.
Dr.Avinash Ramrao Kshirsagar,
R/o Khaperde Bagicha Amrvati,
Taluka & district Amravati.
5-C] Vidya Manohar Malpe,
Dead by Legal Heirs-
5-C1] Manoharrao Venkatrao Malpe,
Adult, occupation : agriculturist,
R/o Loni, taluka Morshi, district Amravati.
5-C2] Rajendra Manoharrao Malpe,
Adult, occupation : agriculturist,
R/o Loni, taluka Morshi, district
Amravati.
.....3/-
::: Uploaded on - 21/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 08/02/2021 06:22:38 :::
Judgment
6393.14 13
3
5-C3) Monika Aniruddha Belsare,
Adult, occupation : household work,
R/o Adgaon, taluka Morshi, district
Amravati.
5-D] Ku.Kokila Tulsidas Golhar,
Aged : 40, occupation : household,
R/o Patrakar colony, ramdaspeth
Nagpur, taluka & district Nagpur.
Kokila Tulsidas Golhar,
R/o 1/4 Patrakar Colony,
Wasant Nagar,
Near Dikshabhumi Nagpur,
Taluka & district Nagpur.
5-E] Sandhya Narendra Pharakhade,
Aged : adult, occupation : household,
R/o Benoda (Shahid), taluka Morshi,
District Amravati.
5-F] Alka Gangadhar Chaudhari,
Aged : Adult, occupation : household,
R/o Hambarde building,
Rajkamal Chowk, Amravati,
Taluka & district Amravati.
Alka Gangadhar Chaudhary,
R/o Hambarde building,
Rajkamal Chowk, Amravati,
Taluka & district Amravati.
6. Vasant Namdeo Khatole,
Since dead legal heirs were not
brought on record by the plaintiff.
7. Vishwash Bajirao Chuke,
Aged : adult, occupation : nil, r/o Valgaon,
Taluka & district Amravati.
.....4/-
::: Uploaded on - 21/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 08/02/2021 06:22:38 :::
Judgment
6393.14 13
4
8. Sushila Raghunathrao Hadole,
Since dead by Legal heirs-
8-A] Nalinibai Keshavrao Bhalekar,
Adult, occupation household,
Kalambeshwar, taluka
Kalambeshwar, district Nagpur.
9. Lilabai Mahaderao Hederao,
Adult, occupation household, r/o
Kasbegavan, taluka Dariyapur, district
Amravati.
10. Prafulbhai Lattubai,
Adult, occupation business, r/o Gandhi
road, Akola, taluka & district Akola.
11. Tilakkumar Lattubhai,
Adult, occupation business, r/o Gandhi
Road, Akola, taluka & district Akola.
12. Navinkumar Lattubai,
Adult, occupation business, r/o Gandhi
road, Akola, taluka & district Akola.
13. Dilip Lalwani,
Adult, occupation business, r/o Gandhi
road, Akola, taluka & district Akola.
14. Rajendra alias Rajesh
Govindrao Kathole, adult occupation :
business, r/o Gandhi Road, Akola, taluka
& district Akola.
15. Usha Vishwanath Kavitkar,
Adult, occupation household, r/o Anjangao,
District Amravati.
16. Nisha Subhas Tadas,
Adult, occupation household, r/o
.....5/-
::: Uploaded on - 21/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 08/02/2021 06:22:38 :::
Judgment
6393.14 13
5
Gorakshan road, Akola, taluka & district
Akola.
17. Ujavala Vilas Kavitkar,
Adult, occupation household, r/o c/o Dr.
Kavitkar, Anjangao Surji, taluka Anjangao
District Amravati.
18. Anusayabai Govindrao Kathole,
Adult, occupation household, r/o M.G.
Road, Akola, taluka & district Akola. ..... Respondents.
===================================
Shri U.J.Deshpande, Counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Z.Z.Haq, Counsel for respondent No.1(ii).
===================================
CORAM : V.M.DESHPANDE, J.
DATE : JANUARY 19, 2021
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned counsel Shri U.J.Deshpande for the
petitioner and learned counsel Shri Z.Z.Haq for respondent
No.1(ii). Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of learned counsel for parties.
2. One Vinayak was original plaintiff. He filed a suit for
partition and separate possession. The present petitioner was
joined as defendant No.6 being his cousin. The plaintiff also joined
one of his sister Sushila as defendant No.9. During the pendency
.....6/-
Judgment
6393.14 13
of the suit, defendant t No.6 present petitioner filed a Pursis on
17.9.2014 giving intimation about death of defendant No.9
Sushila. In pursuance to the said intimation, plaintiff Vinayak filed
an application under Order XXII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil
Procedure for bringing legal representatives of Sushila on record.
The said application is allowed by order dated 19.9.2014. The said
order is under challenged in this writ petition.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that
defendant No.9 Sushila was real sister of plaintiff Vinayak who
died during the pendency of this writ petition. It is submission of
learned counsel for the petitioner that the application does not
disclose that factum of date of death was not within knowledge of
the plaintiff. He submits that Sushila being the real sister of
Vinayak he must knowing the date of her death. He, therefore,
submitted that application under Order XXII Rule 4 of the Code
filed by the original plaintiff Vinayak was barred by limitation and
there was no application for condonation of delay in bringing legal
representatives of Sushila on record.
.....7/-
Judgment
6393.14 13
4. I find some force in the submission of learned counsel
for the petitioner that Sushila being real sister of Vinayak date of
her death must be within his knowledge. However, application
under Order XXII Rule 4 was filed only after the intimation given
by petitioner under Order XXII Rule 10-A of the Code that Sushila
died.
5. In this view of the matter, this writ petition can be
disposed of in following terms:
ORDER
(1) Order dated 19.9.2014 passed below Exhibit 138 in RCS
No.123/2012 is hereby quashed and set aside.
(2) Legal representatives of original plaintiff Vinayak is permitted
to file a fresh application for condonation of delay, if there is any
delay, to support application under Order XXII Rule 4 of the Code.
After such application is filed, learned Judge below shall decide the
said application and give fresh decision on Exhibit 138.
.....8/-
Judgment
6393.14 13
(3) Needless to mention that period from 18.11.2014 till today
shall be excluded from computation of delay in view of pendency
of this writ petition before this court.
The writ petition is disposed of. Rule is made absolute
in aforesaid terms. No costs.
JUDGE
!! BRW !!
...../-
