Baburao Pandurangrao Pawar vs Subhadrabai Limbajirao Pawar And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 11209 Bom

                                           1                               10-SA-69-99.odt



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                        SECOND APPEAL NO.69 OF 1999
                       WITH CA/1491/1999 IN SA/69/1999

                   BABURAO PANDURANGRAO PAWAR
                                 VERSUS
              SUBHADRABAI LIMBAJIRAO PAWAR AND OTHERS
                                    ...
                Advocate for Appellant : Mr. S. S. Choudhari
                                    ...

                                               CORAM :        S. G. MEHARE, J.

                                               DATE       : 01-11-2023

PER COURT :-



1.      Heard        the       learned   counsel   for   the      appellant/original

defendant No.1.

2. The respondents/original plaintiffs had filed a suit for

perpetual injunction against the present appellant/defendant No.1,

who is nephew of the plaintiffs. The suit properties were received

in succession from the husband and the father. On the basis of

such claim, an injunction was sought. The learned trial Court had

dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiffs failed to prove their

exclusive possession over the suit land on the date of filing of the

suit and failed to prove alleged obstruction. However, the learned

first Appellate Court reversed the judgment and decree of the trial

Court and held that the appellants/plaintiffs were in possession of

the suit land on the date of filing of the suit and present

2 10-SA-69-99.odt

appellant/defendant No.1 obstructed their possession. She would

further argue that the substantial questions of law would be,

(i) Whether the respondents/plaintiffs were in possession of the

suit land on the date of filing of the suit ?

(ii) Do the respondents/plaintiffs prove that appellant/defendant

No.1 had obstructed their peaceful possession over the suit

land ?

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this

Court is satisfied that the substantial questions of law as

mentioned above have been involved in this case. Hence, the

substantial questions of law are formulated as follows :-

(i) Does the respondents/plaintiffs prove their possession of the

suit land on the date of the cause of action ?

(ii) Do the respondents/plaintiffs prove that the appellant/

defendants had obstructed their possession over the suit

land ?

4. Respondents are already on record. Hence, no fresh notice

is required to be issued.

5. List the matter for final hearing on 15.01.2024.

( S. G. MEHARE ) JUDGE

rrd