Bombay High Court
Salamatullah Farzand Ali (Deceased) ... vs Kamarbano Farzandali And Others on 28 November, 2023
Author: S. G. Mehare
Bench: S. G. Mehare
1 26- C.A. No. 13215-2023.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13215 OF 2023
IN
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO. 32574 OF 2023
Salamatullah S/o Farzand Ali,
(Since Deceased through L.Rs)
1. Akhtarunnisa Salamatullah Kidwai,
Age : 79 Years, Occ. Nil,
2. Mushtaque Ahmed Salamatullah Kidwai,
Age : 66 Years, Occc. Labour
3. Shaikh Taherabano Shabbir Shaikh,
Age : 59 Years, Occ. Household
4. Nisar Ahmed Salamatullah Kidwai,
Age : 61 Years, Occ. Labor
5. Faridabano Salamatullah Julah,
Age : 59 Yeas, Occ. Household
6. Ayesha Sher Ali,
Age : 58 Years, Occ. Houhsehold
7. Shabana Faruk Shaikh,
Age : 54 Years, Occ. Labor
8. Faruk Salamatullah Kidwai,
Age : 53 Years, Occ. Labour
9. Mohammad Shaid Salamatullah Kidwai,
Age : 51 Years, Occ. Labour
10. Majid Ahmed Salamatullah Kidwai,
Age : 49 Years, Occ. Labour
11. Sajid Hussain Salamatullah Kidwai,
::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2023 03:03:06 :::
2 26- C.A. No. 13215-2023.odt
Age : 48 Years, Occ. Labour
All Resident of Deopur, Dhule .. Applicants
VERSUS
1. Kamarbano Farzandali,
Age : 52 Years, Occ. Nil
2. Sultana Farzandali,
Age : 56 Years, Occ. Nil
3. Parveen Parvez Khan,
Age : 46 Years, Occ. Nil
All R/o. Nehru Nagar, Deopur,
Dhule
4. Javid Hussain Salamatullah Kidwai,
Age : 79 Years, Occ. Labour,
R/o. Nehru Nagar, Deopur,
Dhule. .. Respondents
...
Advocate for the applicants : Mr. G.R. Syed
....
CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.
DATE : 28.11.2023
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants.
2. This is an application for condonation of delay of 674 days in
preferring the Civil Revision Application against the judgment and
order of learned District Judge-5 Dhule passed in Regular Civil Appeal
No. 18/2018.
::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2023 03:03:06 :::
3 26- C.A. No. 13215-2023.odt
3. The applicants case is that he is one of the legal heir who has
share in the suit properties. However, the learned trial Court did not
consider him as a person interested in the properties involved. The
learned trial Court refused to accept him as a legal heir of deceased
Qaisar. The appeal preferred by the applicant was also dismissed
holding that the applicant failed to prove that he was the only legal
heir of deceased Qaisar.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the
substantial right of the applicant has been affected. The properties
involved in the suit were house and fair price shop.
5. There are two concurrent judgments against the applicants. The
parties had disputing about the heirship. The enquiry under the
Bombay Regulation Act and Indian Succession Act is a limited enquiry.
The proceedings under these Acts do not bar the Civil Courts
jurisdiction from determining the rights of the parties. Therefore, the
apprehension of the applicant that the impugned orders would come in
his way if he goes to the Civil Court is unfounded. Considering the
impugned orders this Court is of the view that the applicants have no
good case on merits. Hence, the following order.
::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2023 03:03:06 :::
4 26- C.A. No. 13215-2023.odt
ORDER
(i) The application stands dismissed.
(ii) The applicants are at liberty to approach the Civil Court to prove
their status arising out of the rights they are claiming.
( S. G. MEHARE )
JUDGE
ysk
