Shri. Rajaram Babu Salunkhe (Deceased ... vs Shri. Dhanaji Sarjerao Shewale And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 1802 Bom

Bombay High Court

Shri. Rajaram Babu Salunkhe (Deceased ... vs Shri. Dhanaji Sarjerao Shewale And Ors on 22 January, 2024

Author: Sandeep V. Marne

Bench: Sandeep V. Marne

2024:BHC-AS:3671

            kishor                                  1/2                               16 (22.01.24).doc



                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                         SECOND APPEAL NO.579 OF 2023
            Shri. Rajaram Babu Salunkhe (Decd.)
            (On Behalf Power of Attorney Holder)
            Rameshrajaram Salunke                               ... Appellant
                   Versus
            Shri. Dhanaji Sarjerao Shewale And Ors.             ... Respondents

                                                          ....
            Mr. Rushikesh Patil, for Appellant.
                                                          ....

                                                    CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

DATED : 22 JANUARY 2024.

P.C. :

The challenge in the present petition is to the Judgment and Order dated 03 September 2022 passed by the District Judge, Karad dismissing the Regular Civil Appeal No.19 of 2016 and confirming decree dated 08 February 2016 passed by the Jt. Civil Judge, Junior Division, Karad in Regular Civil Suit No.138 of 2011.

2. I have heard Mr. Patil, the learned counsel appearing for Appellant.

3. After having considered submissions of Mr. Patil, it is seen that the agreement for sale was executed on 18 December 1975. Though the agreement refers that government permission is required for sale transaction, it has come in evidence that no such permission was actually necessary. It also

kishor 2/2 16 (22.01.24).doc

appears that when the suit property was sold by Defendant Nos.1 and 2 in favour of Defendant No.3 on 07 February 2011, no such permission was procured. The Trial Court and First Appellate Court have held that Plaintiffs waited for 32 long years without taking any steps for executing sale deed in his name. Suit is also appears to be barred by limitation.

4. The Trial Court and First Appellate Court have recorded findings of facts while dismissing the Suit and the Appeal. No substantial question of law is involved in the Second Appeal. Second Appeal is accordingly rejected.

SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

KISHOR           VISHNU

VISHNU           Date:
KAMBLE           2024.01.24
                 17:30:46
                 +0530