Bombay High Court
Govindo Shaw @ Karmarkar S/O ... vs Partho S/O Ashok Kumar Roy on 15 March, 2022
Bench: Manish Pitale
23.sa.20.22 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Second Appeal No.20 of 2022
Govindo Shaw @ Karmarkar s/o Laxman Shaw & another
vs.
Partho s/o Ashok Kumar Roy
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Mr. A.M. Kukday, Advocate for the Appellants.
Mr. Shashank Savdekar, Advocate for the Respondent.
CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J.
DATE : 15th MARCH, 2022.
Heard Mr. A.M. Kukday, learned Counsel
appearing for the appellants.
02] Since the records are already here and the
learned Counsel for the appellants has placed on record the
paper-book of the first appellate Court, the appeal can be
considered for final disposal.
03] Issue notice to the respondent for final disposal
on the following substantial questions of law :
(i) Whether the judgment of learned appellate Court
as well as the learned trial Court can be
considered to be just and proper when both the
learned Courts below have not appreciated the
evidence on record in its proper perspective,
which has resulted in allowing the suit and
further dismissing the appeal preferred by the
appellants?
23.sa.20.22 2/3
(ii) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the
learned Courts below can be sustained when in
evidence the respondent in cross-examination
admitted that he had purchased property in
Kolkatta from one Swapna Chakroborti and the
cheques bearing Nos.43937 and 221764, dated
17/02/2011 and 28/12/2010 amounting to
₹9,00,000/- and ₹5,00,000/- respectively, drawn
on Bank of Baroda matches/reflects with the
memo of consideration in the Deed of
Conveyance i.e. Exh.33?
(iii) Whether the judgment of the learned Courts
below can be sustained in view of the fact that
the notice dated 01/08/2012 being Exh.42 and
the said notice was sent before filing of the suit
wherein an amount of ₹22,00,000/- was
demanded and in the notice, it was mentioned
that the said amount was given to the respondent
for purchase of property from Swapna
Chakraborty and the cheque numbers and
amount mentioned in the written statement
matches with the amount and cheque number
mentioned in the Deed of Conveyance at Exh.33?
02] Mr. Shashank Savdekar, learned Counsel waives
notice on behalf of the respondent.
03] Notice shall be returnable on 21st April, 2022.
23.sa.20.22 3/3
Civil Application [CAS] No.40/2022 :
This is an application for seeking stay to the
decree passed in favour of the non-applicant/respondent.
02] This Court has issued notice for final disposal in
this appeal by framing substantial questions of law. Since,
this is a money decree, stay can be granted subject to the
applicants/appellants depositing some amount in this Court.
It is an undisputed position that during pendency of the
appeal before the first appellate Court, the applicants/
appellants had deposited an amount of ₹5,00,000/-, which
was withdrawn by the non-applicant/respondent.
03] In view of the above, there shall be stay to the
decree passed against the applicants/appellants subject to
the applicants/appellants depositing further amount of
₹5,00,000/- before the Executing Court within four weeks
from today.
04] It is made clear that if the applicants/appellants
fail to deposit the said amount within the stipulated period
of time, the stay granted by this Court shall stand vacated
without further reference to this Court.
05] The application is allowed and disposed of
accordingly.
Signed by:SANDESH DAULATRAO
JUDGE
*sandesh WAGHMARE
Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Judge
Signing Date:16.03.2022 16:23
