Vitthal S/O Vyankatrao Kasulkar vs Smt. Sindhutai Wd/O Vasantrao ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 8829 Bom

SA st 3370.21.                                                                                                 1/2


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

                                    Second Appeal St. No.3370/2021
                         Vitthal Kasulkar V Smt. Sindhutai Kasulkar and others
*******************************************************************************************************************
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders                               Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
*******************************************************************************************************************
                  Shri H.S. Chitaley, Adv for appellant.

                  CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J.

DATE : 06th JULY, 2021.

Hearing was conducted through Video Conferencing and the learned Counsel agreed that the audio and visual quality was proper.

2. Two weeks time is granted to remove the office objections.

3. Heard learned Advocate Shri Chitaley for the appellant/original defendant no.1.

4. He is the brother-in-law of the original plaintiff. Plaintiff relied upon a Will dated 21-04-1995 whereas the defendant no.1 relied upon a Will Deed dated 26-12-1996. The suit was for declaration of the Will Deed dated 26-12-1996 as null and void. There is a further prayer for declaring two Sale Deeds by defendant no.1 in favour of defendant nos. 5 and 6 as null and void. There was also a prayer for restoration of the possession from new purchasers i.e. defendant nos. 5 and 6. It seems that the trial Court has decreed the suit in toto.

SA st 3370.21. 2/2

5. When the defendant no.1 went in appeal, his appeal was also dismissed. Learned Advocate Shri Chitaley from the judgment of the trial Court, submitted that the trial Court has given contrary findings in respect of the Will on which the plaintiff has placed reliance. He also invited my attention to some of the observations wherein the trial Court has given inconsistent findings so far as the restoration of possession is concerned.

6. After reading the trial Court judgment, the appellant to address the Court about relief of restoration of possession that is to day whether it connects to the properties sold by two Sale Deeds or whether it connects to the house property. The direction to restore possession is given to defendant nos. 5 to 6.

7. Issue notice to the respondents before admission for final disposal.

8. Kept it after four weeks.

JUDGE Deshmukh