Kavita vs Smt. Hulsobai
2025 Latest Caselaw 11713 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Kavita vs Smt. Hulsobai on 27 November, 2025

Author: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

Bench: Dwarka Dhish Bansal

                                                              1                                SA-872-2020
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                        SA No. 872 of 2020
                                            (KAVITA AND OTHERS Vs SMT. HULSOBAI AND OTHERS )



                           Dated : 27-11-2025
                                 Shri Saket Mallik - Advocate for the appellants.
                                 Shri Ashok Kumar Jaiswal - Advocate for respondents.

Heard on I.A. No.4028/2020, which is an application under Order XLI Rule 5 of CPC filed by the appellants and I.A. No.13924/2025 and 13926/2025, filed by respondents 1-2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties on the aforesaid applications. From the record it is clear that both the Courts below have concurrently decreed the plaintiffs' suit for partition and separate possession, holding the plaintiffs to be entitled for 1/4 - 1/4 share as mentioned in last paragraph 30 of the judgment passed by Trial Court.

This appeal was admitted on 12.04.2022 and while passing the order on application (I.A. No.4028/2020), this Court directed both the parties to maintain status-quo.

With the support of the applications (I.A. No.13924/2025 and

13926/2025), learned counsel for the respondents submits that in the light of interim order dated 12.04.2022 passed by this Court, the appellants are making interference in possession of the respondents, whereas both the parties are having equal share and possession over the suit property received by them through their father and mother (Sitaram and Waarli Bai).

It is apparent that on the basis of Will, which has not been found

2 SA-872-2020 proved by both the Courts below, the appellants are claiming exclusive ownership and possession over the suit property.

Since both the Courts below have decreed the suit and have found both the parties to be entitled for equal 1/4 share through their mother and father/grandfather, therefore, application (I.A. No.4028/2020) under Order XLI Rule 5 CPC is disposed of with the observation that, partition proceedings, if any, may go on but the concerning parties shall not be delivered separate possession.

It is also made clear that because both the parties are co-owners and the present second appeal is still pending for consideration, no injunction in respect of possession in favour of either of the parties to the second appeal can be issued.

With the aforesaid, all the three applications (I.A. No.4028/2020, 13924/2025 and 13926/2025) are disposed of/closed.

List for final hearing in due course.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE

ss