Bombay High Court
Chandrabhan S/O Ganpat Hatwar And ... vs Shantabai W/O Kothiram Bondre And ... on 27 September, 2022
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
2709 SA 326 of 2022.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
SECOND APPEAL NO.326/2022
Chandrabhan s/o Ganpat Hitwar and others
...Versus...
Kothiram Tulsiram Bondre (Dead) through L.Rs.
Shantabai w/o Kothiram Bondre and others
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders or directions
and Registrar's orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -
Shri S.V. Sohoni, Advocate for appellants
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATE : 27/09/2022
1. Today, Shri Sohoni, learned counsel for the
appellants by inviting my attention to the evidence of PW 1-
plaintiff who has been examined at Exh.20, submits that since
the plaintiff, after recording his examination-in-chief, did not
present himself for cross-examination, in view of which, by an
order dated 08/06/2011 the evidence of PW 1- Kothiram
Bondre was closed, which position is also reflected from
para 15 of the judgment of the learned Trial Court, could the
PW 2 - Chandrakant Kothiram Bondre, the son of the original
plaintiff who was in no way connected with the suit
transaction and was brought on record after the demise of the
plaintiff on 25/05/2012 prove the readiness and willingness of
2709 SA 326 of 2022.odt
Kothiram vis-a-vis the agreement in question, in view of
which, the following additional substantial question of law
arises for consideration.
Question : Whether in absence of the plaintiff
having presented himself for cross-examination and the
evidence of the plaintiff on that count having been
closed, his readiness and willingness vis-a-vis the
agreement in question can be proved by PW 2-
Chandrakant Kothiram Bondre his son, in absence of
any material on record to indicate that PW 2 -
Chandrakant Kothiram Bondre was aware of the
transaction ?
2. Admit on the aforesaid substantial question of
law.
3. The appellants to serve the respondents on merits
by Hamdast.
CIVIL APPLICATION (CAS) NO.866/2022
1. The application seeks stay of the impugned
judgment and decree.
2. In view of the admission of the appeal on the
aforesaid substantial question of law, the effect and operation
2709 SA 326 of 2022.odt
of the judgment of the learned Trial Court as confirmed by the
learned Appellate Court is hereby stayed, subject to the
condition of the appellants depositing a sum of Rs.6,00,000/-
along with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of the
agreement till today, in this Court within a period of two
weeks from today.
3. It is made clear that if the amount is not
deposited, the application for stay shall stand dismissed. In
case the amount is so deposited, the same shall be invested in
an interest carrying Fixed Deposit.
(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
Wadkar
Digitally signed bySHAILENDRA
SUKHADEORAO WADKAR
Signing Date:28.09.2022 13:39
