Purushotaam Badrinath Chandak vs Savitribai Badrinarayan Chandak ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 716 Bom

                       (27)-WP-7390 & 8669-21.doc.


                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
          Digitally
          signed by
          BALAJI
BALAJI    GOVINDRAO


                                        WRIT PETITION NO.7390 OF 2021
GOVINDRAO PANCHAL
PANCHAL   Date:
          2022.01.20
          11:08:09
          +0530



                       Mr. Purushottam Badrinarayan Chandak                ..Petitioner
                             Versus
                       Savitrabai Badrinarayan Chandak
                       (Since deceased through her LRs)
                       Smt. Shakuntala Pannalal Bhutada and Ors.          ..Respondents

                                                    WITH
                                        WRIT PETITION NO.8669 OF 2021

                       Subhash Badrinarayan Chandak                        ..Petitioner
                             Versus
                       Mr. Purushottam Badrinarayan Chandak and Ors.       ..Respondents

                       Dr. Uday P. Warunjikar a/w Ms. Vaishnavi Gujarathi, for the
                       Petitioner in WP No.7390 of 2021 & for Respondent No.1 in WP
                       No.8669 of 2021.
                       Mr. Girish R. Agrawal, for Respondent No.2 in WP No.7390 of 2021
                       & for Respondent No.3 in WP No.8669 of 2021.
                       Mr. Ajay A. Joshi, for Respondent No.3 in WP No.7390 of 2021 & for
                       Petitioner in WP No.8669 of 2021.

                                                     CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE : 19th JANUARY, 2022 P.C.

1. In execution proceedings of decree for partition, the orders impugned permitting judgment debtor to deposit the amount of consideration for execution of sale-deed from the said Court came to be passed.

2. Admittedly, valuation of the suit property is not carried

BGP. 1 of 2 (27)-WP-7390 & 8669-21.doc.

out from a valuer and the acceptance of offer of judgment debtor is without any legal bases.

3. In the aforesaid background, parties hereto have consented for setting aside of the order dated 23 rd October, 2021 passed below Exh.1 and order dated 9th September, 2021 permitting deposit of consideration of Rs.75,00,000/- in the Court at the behest of judgment debtor No.2. As such, the orders impugned in both these petitions are set aside.

4. In view of consent extended by the parties, Trial Court is directed to appoint Court Commissioner (Government Valuer) for carrying out effective valuation of the suit property.

5. Parties to the decree are at liberty to submit their offers over and above the one which will be mentioned in the valuer's report. Such claims shall be considered and dealt with by the Executing Court in accordance with law.

6. Entire aforesaid procedure be completed within a period of ten weeks from the date of communication of this order as the execution of decree is being prolonged for one or the other reason.

7. Both these petitions stand disposed of in above terms.

                                          [NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]


BGP.                                                         2 of 2