Vilas Sahebrao Aghav And Others vs Sakhubai Chhabu Kshirsagar ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9987 Bom

                                                                           1006-SA-3-19.odt




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          SECOND APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2019
                         WITH CA/330/2019 IN SA/3/2019

Vilas Sahebrao Aghav and Others                           ..APPELLANTS
      VERSUS
Sakhubai Chhabu Kshirsagar
(Dead) Through L.Rs.
Shamrao Chhabu Kshirsagar and Others                      ..RESPONDENTS

                                    ....
Mr. A.D. Aghav, Advocate for appellants
Mr. M.H. Shaikh, Advocate for respondent nos.1A to 1C
                                    ....

                                             CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT, J.

DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER, 2022

PER COURT :

1. Heard.

2. The challenge in this second appeal is to judgment and decree

dated 26th July, 2018 passed by the Ad-hoc District Judge-6, Ahmednagar in

Regular Civil Appeal No. 262 of 2014. The appellants herein are the original

Defendant nos.4 to 6 in Regular Civil Suit No. 406 of 2007. It was a suit for

partition and separate possession of the land bearing Gut No.154. The trial

Court dismissed the suit holding the suit land to be an exclusive property of

Defendant Nos.1 to 3.

1 / 3

1006-SA-3-19.odt

3. The plaintiffs, therefore, preferred the first appeal. The same

came to be allowed. The claim of the plaintiffs in the suit was that the suit

land was an Inam land. It was originally granted to one Balwant. On his

demise, Balwant's elder son - Eknath got it re-granted in his name by virtue

of rule of primogeniture. However, since the land was originally granted to

Balwant, who was common ancestor, on his demise the re-grant would enure

for the benefit of the entire progeny of deceased Balwant and not Eknath

alone. The heirs of Eknath sold the suit land to the present appellants

disregarding claim of the plaintiffs.

4. The first appellate Court accepted claim of the plaintiffs and

decreed the suit. It appears that the suit land was inferior watan land. The

provisions of the Maharashtra Revenue Patels (Abolition of Office) Act, 1962

and the provisions of inferior Vatan Abolition Act are pari metria. In case of

Annasaheb Bapusaheb Patil and Ors. Vs. Balwant alias Balasaheb Babusaheb

Patil (Dead) by L.Rs. And Heirs etc., 1995 (1) ALL MR 352 , the Apex Court

has observed that once the land is re-granted to anyone of the family

members of the original watandar, the land would enure for the benefit of all

the members of the family meaning thereby, the land would partake

character of a joint family property. As such, the original plaintiffs, who are

the legal representative of the real brother of deceased - Eknath, did have

undivided share in the suit land. The contention of learned counsel for the

2 / 3

1006-SA-3-19.odt

appellants that Eknath, on demise of Balwant inherited the suit land by virtue

of rule of primogeniture does not stand in the face of Apex Court's judgment

in Annasaheb Patil's case (supra). On the question of bona fide purchase for

valuable consideration is concerned, it is to be stated that the appellants had

admittedly not given a public notice before purchasing the suit land. As such,

no substantial question of law does arise in this second appeal.

5. Second appeal stands dismissed. In view of the same, civil

application stands disposed of.

( R.G. AVACHAT, J. ) SSD

3 / 3