Amit Prakashrao Bawaskar vs Sau.Rupali Sharadchandra Borkar ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5704 Bom

                                                     Second Appeal No.334/2022
                                      :: 1 ::


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                  SECOND APPEAL NO.334 OF 2022 WITH
                   CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8533 OF 2022


 Amit Prakashrao Bawaskar                               ... APPELLANT

          VERSUS

 Sau. Rupali Sharadchandra Borkar & ors.... RESPONDENTS

                           .......
 Ms Nima R. Suryawanshi, Advocate for appellant
                           .......

                                  CORAM :        R. G. AVACHAT, J.
                                  DATE     :     22nd JUNE, 2022.
 ORDER:

Heard Ms Suryawanshi, learned counsel for the

appellant. This is original defendant's Second Appeal. He has

suffered concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the

Courts below. The suit, Regular Civil Suit No.207/2015 was

filed by three sisters of the appellant herein for partition and

separate possession of the property described in the plaint,

besides some cash amount in deposit with State Bank of

Hyderabad. The appellant is challenging the judgment and

decree only in respect of granting the original plaintiffs' share

in residential flat, situated at Shahnoorwadi, Aurangabad.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant/ original

Second Appeal No.334/2022 :: 2 ::

defendant would submit that, the appellant has been in

service. He has purchased the suit flat by raising a housing

loan. The loan is being repaid from his monthly salary. The

learned counsel meant to say that the suit flat was exclusively

owned by the appellant. It was only out of love and affection

the sale deed was executed in the joint name of himself and

his mother. According to learned counsel, the material

evidence that the loan raised for purchase of the flat is being

repaid from the monthly salary of the appellant was not taken

into consideration by both the Courts below. She would

further submit that, the case of the plaintiffs was that they

had contributed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- for purchase of the

flat. Both the Courts below have negatived their contention.

The learned counsel, therefore, urged for issuance of notice in

the matter.

3. Considered the submissions advanced. Perused

the judgments delivered by both the Courts below.

Admittedly, the flat has been purchased in the name of the

appellant and his mother. True, the appellant has raised a

loan for purchase of the flat. The loan is being repaid by him.

It is his case that, only out of love and affection the sale deed

was executed in the name of himself and his mother. Both

the Courts below have concurrently held that the father of the

Second Appeal No.334/2022 :: 3 ::

appellant was in service. His mother has received retiral

benefits. The mother might have contributed for purchase of

the flat. Since the flat has been purchased in the name of

mother along with the appellant, both the Courts below have

rightly held the mother to have equal share in the flat along

with the appellant. Both the Courts below have granted share

to the daughters/ three plaintiffs and the appellant also in the

one half share in the flat. It is a concurrent finding of fact

recorded by both the Courts below. It is reiterated that the

mother had with her, funds since her husband was in service.

4. It was averred in the plaint that the mother had

also contributed for purchase of the flat. The finding recorded

by both the Courts below is a finding of fact. This Court finds

no substantial question of law to have been involved in this

Second Appeal. The appeal is, therefore, liable to be

dismissed at admission stage itself. The same is, therefore,

dismissed. Consequently, Civil Application is also dismissed.

( R. G. AVACHAT ) JUDGE

fmp/-