All Cases

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.524 OF 2006 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.)NO.27425 OF 2005 Popat Jaysingh Awale. ..Applicant. V/s. Shamrao Dattu Landage & Ors. ..Respondents. Ms.Manda Loke for S.S.Kulkarni for applicant. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE : FEBRUARY 14, 2006. P.C. : Heard counsel for the applicant. Rule, returnable on 14th March, 2006. Applicant to serve the respondent(s) by advocate's notice either personally and/or by courier and/or by speed post and/or by RPAD and/or by email and/or by fax and file affidavit of service before the returnable date.

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.524 of 2006. IN FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.27425 OF 2005. Office notes, office memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or Judge's orders. orders or directions and Registrar's orders. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ms.Manda Loke for Shri S.S.Kulkarni for the Applicant. CORAM : ABHAY S.OKA, J. DATED : 14th MARCH, 2006. P.C.: 1.Await service till 7th April 2006. 2.Till next date the order of stay granted in Civil Application No.687 of 2006 will continue to operate. If the Respondents are not served on or before the next date, ad-interim relief will not be continued. Judge.

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET CIVIL APPLICATION NO.524 OF 2006 IN FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.27425 OF 2005 ............................................................. Office Notes,Office memorandum of Coram, appearances,Court's Court's or orders or directions Judge's orders & Registrar's orders. ............................................................. Mr.Sachin Chavan i/b Mr.S.S.Kulkarni for the Applicant Mr.Amit Sale for Respondent Nos.1 to 4. CORAM: A.S.OKA, J. DATED: APRIL 21, 2006. P.C.: Heard Advocates for the parties. The prayer is for waiver of the requirement of the deposit under sub section 1 of section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. On plain reading of the proviso to sub section 1 of section 173, it is clear that the requirement of deposit of Rs.25,000/ is mandatory and the court has no power to grant exemption. Hence, Application is rejected. Time of six weeks is granted to deposit the amount of Rs.25,000/-. If the amount is not deposited within stipulated period, First Appeal and all pending Civil Applications will stand dismissed for want of prosecution. Ad-interim relief granted in Civil Application No.687 of 2006 will continue to operate only for a period of six weeks from today. Civil Application is disposed of in above terms. Judge.

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.38 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1750 OF 2006 State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Applicants Vs. Mr. Ramesh Vaja Rabari & Anr. ... Respondents Mr. D.S. Mhaispurkar, A.P.P. for the applicants-State. None for the respondents. CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & D. B. BHOSALE, JJ. DATED : 12TH APRIL, 2007. P.C.: - Heard Mr. Mhaispurkar, the learned A.P.P. appearing for the applicants. As a last chance, time to complete the investigation is extended by three weeks from today i.e. till 3/5/2007. Criminal application is disposed of. [SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [D. B. BHOSALE, J.]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1083 OF 2002 Gulab Shivsharanappa Nippani ...Petitioner vs. Smt.Tangemma ...Respondents Gulab Nippani Ms A.S.Malvankar for the Petitioner Ms M.M.Deshmukh,A.P.P. for State CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 15,2005 P.C.: Heard Advocate for the Petitioner. The Petitioner is the husband of the Respondent No.1. The Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the children of the Petitioner and the Respondent No.1. On the application made by the Respondent Nos.1 to 3, the learned Magistrate granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.300/ p.m. in favour of the Respondent Nos.1 to 3. The Revision Applications preferred by the Petitioner and the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 were heard together. The Revision Application preferred by the Petitioner was dismissed and the one preferred by the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 was partly allowed by enhancing the maintenance amount to Rs.500/- p.m. each payable to the Respondent Nos.1 to 3. After having heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner I find no merit in the Petition. The Courts below have accepted the evidence of the Respondent No.1 and her witnesses and have come to the conclusion that the marriage of the Respondent No.1 with the Petitioner has been established. In so far as quantum of maintenance is concerned, on the basis of salary certificate it was found that gross salary of the Petitioner is Rs.11,767/- p.m. and even after deductions, he is getting Rs.5937/- p.m.. The total maintenance payable by the Petitioner is only Rs.1500/- p.m. Hence, no case is made out for interference. Petition is rejected. JUDGE

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6610 OF 2004 Prakashanand Rupadevi Trust ... Petitioner versus Narottamananda Guru ... ... Gopalanandaji Brahmchari ... Respondent Mr. G.S. Godbole for Mr. P.R. Arjunwadkar, for the Petitioner. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. 19th August 2004 P.C.: . Issue notice before admission returnable six weeks. Petitioner to serve the Respondent. That be done either personally or by speed post/courier/e-mail/fax and file affidavit of service on or before the returnable date, failing which the petition to stand dismissed for non-prosecution without further reference to the Court. . Status quo as of today be maintained till further orders. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.)

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.6610 OF 2004 Mr.G.S.Godbole i/b P.R.Arjunwadkar for the Petitioner. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's order or directions Court's or Judge's orders ¦ ¦ ¦ CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, J. ¦ DATED: 6TH JULY,2005 P.C.: ... Both the courts below have concurrently found that the Plaintiff is not entitled to temporary injunction that he was seeking. In any case, perusal of the application shows that the temporary injunction was sought in such wide terms that no court should pass an order in favour of the Plaintiff. Petition has no substance. It is rejected.

Order - Status 2: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.14771 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI I/c.REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 02nd August, 2016 3 weeks time granted for removing office objections. sd/­ I/c.Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 02.08.16

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3891 OF 2016 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance .. Appellant Vs. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde & Ors. .. Respondents Ms.Varsha Chavan, Advocate for appellant. None for respondents. CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. DATE : 21ST NOVEMBER 2018 P.C. FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 1 Not on board. Taken upon production. 2 Heard. 3 Admit. 4 Call for record and proceedings. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3891 OF 2016 5 Issue notice of the application, returnable on 30th January 2019. 6 On the applicant depositing the entire amount of compensation as awarded by the Claims Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today before the Claims Tribunal, Kolhapur, execution proceedings shall remain stayed until further orders. (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1380 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3891 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None Present. CORAM : V.R. KACHARE REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 30th January, 2019 Await Service for 5 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 30.01.19

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....Respondent Ms.Varsha Chavan For Appellant CORAM : K.K. TATED, J DATE : 11th March, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the Appellant , Stand over to 01/04/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....Respondent Ms Poonam Mittal Adv i/by Varsha Chavan Adv For Appellant Vikrant Anand Desai Adv For Respondent No. 1 CORAM : K.K. TATED, J DATE : 10th April, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the Apellant , Stand over to After vacation ie on 18/6/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited ....Appellant V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....Respondent Mr D S Joshii/by Varsha Chavan, advocate For Appellant None for Respondent. CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J DATE : 18th June, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the petitioners, Stand over to 25/06/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.10315 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1380 OF 2016 Ganesh Rangrao Akurde ...Applicant In the matter between:- IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited ...Appellant vs. SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Digitally signed by SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2024.09.05 15:24:30 +0530 Ganesh Rangrao Akurde and Anr. ...Respondents ***** Mr.Pritesh K. Bohade:- Advocate for Applicant. Ms.Varsha Chavan:- Advocate for Appellant. ***** CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 27th AUGUST 2024 P. C. :- Heard learned Advocate Ms.Chavan for the Appellant Insurance Company and learned Advocate Mr.Bohade for Respondent – Claimant – driver of the motorcycle. Another vehicle involved is the trax. Its number could not be ascertained. The FIR is lodged against the trax vehicle. There was a Petition filed by the driver against the Insurance Company of the motorcycle under the provisions of Section 163A of the MV Act, 1988. 3. The Appeal is of the year 2016. Recently, this Application for withdrawal is filed. Withdrawal is strongly opposed by learned Advocate Ms.Chavan. She relied upon the observations in case of Ramkhiladi and Anr. v/s. United India Insurance Company and Anr. 1 and more specifically, Para No.5.5 and 5.6. According to her, the Appeal can be disposed of finally. Compilation of documents filed by her is taken on record. Marked 'X' for identification. Copy is served to other side. Stand over to 4 th September 2024. To be listed for final arguments / Interim Application. [S. M. MODAK, J.] 1 AIR 2020 SUPREME COURT 527

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited....APPELLANT V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 10315 OF 2024 In First Appeal 1380 OF 2016 Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....PETITIONER V/S Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited And Anr. ....RESPONDENT Ms. Varsha Chavan for the Appellant Mr. Pritesh K. Bohade for Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK J DATE : 4th September, 2024 P.C. : At the request of the learned Counsel for the Appellant(s)/ Applicant(s) / Petitioner(s) / Respondent No. stand over to 03/10/2024. Ad-interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited....APPELLANT V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....RESPONDENT VARSHA CHAVAN for Petitioner VIKRANT ANAND DESAI for Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK J DATE : 3rd October, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 20/11/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited....APPELLANT V/S Mr. Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 10315 OF 2024 In First Appeal 1380 OF 2016 Ganesh Rangrao Akurde And Anr. ....PETITIONER V/S Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited And Anr. ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHIVKUMAR DIGE J DATE : 28th January, 2025 P.C. : For final hearing on dated 03/02/2025 Weekly Board. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1380 OF 2016 IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited. …. Appellant Versus Ganesh Rangrao Akurde and Anr. …. Respondents Ms. Varsha Chavan, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. Pritesh K. Bohade, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 18th JUNE, 2025. P.C. : SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date: 2025.06.21 10:05:31 +0530 Heard learned counsel for the Appellant and learned counsel for the Respondent – Claimant. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the claim petition was filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "MV Act'). The accident occurred due to sole negligence of the deceased but the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.4,23,920/-. As per view of Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Ramkhiladi and Anr. Vs. United India Insurance Company and Anr. AIR 2020 SCC 527, the Claimant is entitled of Rs.1,00,000/-, but this fact has not been considered by the Tribunal. Hence, requested to allow the appeal. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits the Claimant is ready to accept Rs.1,00,000/- out of the deposited compensation amount. Hence, requested to pass appropriate order. Considering the submission of both the learned counsel, I pass following order. ORDER i. Appeal is allowed. ii. The Respondent/Claimant is entitled Rs.1,00,000/- @ 8% interest from the date of filing claim petition, till realization of the amount. iii. The Claimant is permitted to withdraw Rs.1,00,000/- @ 8% interest along with accrued interest thereon from the amount, deposited by the Appellant/Insurance Company. iv. The Appellant /Insurance Company is permitted to withdraw remaining amount along with accrued interest. v. The statutory amount along with accrued interest be transmitted to the Tribunal. The parties are at liberty to withdraw it, as per Rules. vi. Record and Proceeding be sent back to the Tribunal. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed and disposed of. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1836 OF 2009 Kashi Mitha Tandel. .. Petitioner. vs. Chief of Police, Nani Daman, & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr. Uday Warunjikar for the petitioner. Mr. R.M. More, APP., for the Respondent/State. CORAM : J. N. PATEL & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 23RD NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. : Issue notice to respondents returnable two weeks. Notice be sent by registered post A.D., in addition to usual mode of service. S.O. to 7.12.2009. ( J. N. PATEL, J.) ( A. A. SAYED, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No.1836/2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's Orders Mr Manoj Shirsat i/b Uday P. Warunjikar for the Petitioner. Mr D.A. Nalavade – for Union of India for Respondent No.1. Mr S.N. Gawate, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 23RD MARCH, 2010 P.C. :- Mr Nalavade, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent, seeks three week's time to file reply affidavit. He may do so with an advance copy thereof to the advocate for the petitioner. Stand over to 12th April, 2010. (A.R.JOSHI,J.) (D.B.BHOSALE,J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No.1836 of 2009 1 Smt.Kashi Mitha Tandel Petitioner Vs. Chief of Police, Nani Daman, Union Territory & ors. Respondents Mr.R.M.More i/b. Mr.U.P.Warunjikar for petitioner. Mr.J.P.Yagnik, APP for State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. June 17, 2010. P.C. We are informed across the bar that Mr.Nalawade has been hospitalised and though affidavit of the police office is filed, a copy of the same has not yet been served on the learned counsel for the petitioner by Mr.Nalawade. Stand over for two weeks. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.) srk

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1836 OF 2009 Smt. Kashi Mitha Tandel ....Petitioner. Vs. Chief of Police, Nani Daman, Union Territory & Ors. ....Respondents. Mr. Uday Warunjikar a/w Mr. Rahul More for the Petitioner. Mr. D.A. Nalawade, Special P.P. for U.O.I. Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP for the State. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE : 8th July, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard Mr. Warunjikar a/w Mr.Rahul More, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Nalawade, the Special P.P. for the Respondents. We have perused the affidavit in reply filed by Shri K.B. Mahajan, P.S.I., Khanvel in the Union Territory of Dadara and Nagar Haveli. 2 The affidavit clearly states that the report received from the Government Examiner, GEQD, Hyderabad dated 15/02/2010 supports, prima facie, the complainant's case. 3 Mr. Nalawade, further states that the affiant Shri K.B. Mahajan has been transferred and in his place Mr. M.R. Rohit, P.I. from Daman Police station, is the I.O.. We direct the I.O. to take further steps as required under the Criminal Procedure Code including filing of chargesheet under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Competent Court as expeditiously as possible and preferably before 7th August, 2010. 4 The Petition is disposed off in terms of the above directions. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or orders or directions & Judge's orders. Registrar's orders. – Shri U.J. Makhija along with Roshan Pinto i/by Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt and Caroe for the Applicant. CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.P.BHANGALE, JJ DATED : 20TH MARCH 2015 P.C.: . Rule, returnable on 6th May 2015. In addition to the service through Court, private service is permitted. (A.P.BHANGALE, J) (A.S.OKA, J)

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the R.No.2 Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, REGISTRAR (JUDL ­ II) Date : 06th May, 2015 Await Service for 6 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­ II) dsm – R(J­II) – 06.05.15

Order - Status 9: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Applicant Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, REGISTRAR (JUDL ­ II) Date : 17th June, 2015 Re­issue Notice to Respondent No.1, returnable after 6 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­ II) dsm – R(J­II) – 17.06.15

Order - Status 11: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Appellant Present. Advocate for the Respondent Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 29th July, 2015 Await Service for 4 weeks. 67 Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm ­ R(J­II) – 29.07.15

Order - Status 12: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Appellant Present. Advocate for the Respondent No.2 Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 26th August, 2015 S.O. to 4 weeks for taking steps as against unserved Respondent No.4. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 26 .08.15

Order - Status 14: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Petitioner Present. Advocate for the Respondent No.2 Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 23rd September, 2015 Both Ld. Counsel submits that there is error in office remark about Respondent No.4 instead of Respondent No.1. Order dated 26/08/2015 corrected. S.O. to 4 weeks. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 23.09.15

Order - Status 16: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Appellant Present. Advocate for the Respondent No.2 Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 21st October, 2015 S.O. to 4 weeks for taking steps as against unserved Respondent No.1. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 21.10.15

Order - Status 18: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.16008 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Appellant Present. CORAM : R.M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 19th January, 2016 Advocate for the Appellant makes statement that he has already filed Affidavit alongwith copies of Newspapers regarding service of Respondent No.1. Office to verify and matter to proceed. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 19.01.16

Order - Status 22: Shephali IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2513 OF 2014 IN FIRST APPEAL ST NO. 16008 OF 2014 The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay …Applicant Versus Madanlal Shah & Co & Anr …Respondents Mr UJ Makhija *, i/b Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe, for the Appellant.* Ms Naseem Sumnani *, for Respondent No. 2.* CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 12th July 2017 PC:- 1. There is a delay of 103 days in filing the First Appeal. The delay is sufficiently explained in the Civil Application. It is condoned. 2. The Civil Application is made absolute and disposed of accordingly. No costs. (G. S. PATEL, J) Page 1 of 1 12th July 2017

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.450 OF 2014 Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav & Ors. ...Applicants V/s. Shri Dnyaneshwar Vishnu Kate & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi i/b. Miss Rutuja Ambekar for the Applicants. Mr. S.G. Kudle for Respondent No.10. CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATED : OCTOBER 08, 2014. P.C. : 1 Heard the learned counsel for the rival parities. 2 For the present, the controversy is only about Survey No.119/2/B. I quote paragraph 42 from the judgment of the lower appellate Court which reads thus : " From this purpose entries in 7/12 extract of land survey no.119 at Exh.265 for the year 194344 is also material to consider. This entry shows that land was acquired by military and Mahadu and Vishnu had taken the land for cultivation from military. Anyhow one thing is clear that land gat no.119 was acquired by the government and Mahadu and heirs of Vishnu had received that compensation as per their respective shares. If this is the position then it has to be said that tenancy rights of the family came to an end and land gat no.119 became the property of the government." 3 The observation made in paragraph 41 and paragraph 42 shows that the land had vested in the Government in its military department. The finding is based on the basis of mutation entries but there it is not clear as contended by Mr. Kudale nor it is substantiated by the documentary evidence that the Government had released the land after it had vested in it. The parties are at liberty to place the documents of release, if any, on record, since Second Appeal No.450 of 2014 is admitted for final hearing. However, looking at the finding in paragraph 42 as above, it appears prima facie that neither the appellant nor the respondent would be able to claim any right to go ahead with the construction on the said land or as the case may be without hearing the concerned Government. Hence I make the following order : ORDER i) The appellant to join the concerned Government as a party to the present Civil Application as well as Second Appeal and effect service before the next date. ii) Issue notice to the newly added party in both Second Appeal as well as Civil Application, returnable after vacation for hearing on this application. iii) Till the decision of the application finally the earlier order granting statusquo shall continue in operation. iv) S.O. for 6 weeks. (A. B. CHAUDHARI, J.) waghmare.

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION No.1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.450 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders. Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr.Ratnesh Dube i/b Ms.Rutuja Ambekar for the applicants Mr.S.G.Kudle for the respondent No.10. CORAM : K.K.TATED, J. DATED : 26/11/2014 PC : 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 Liberty granted to the respondents to file their additional AffidavitinReply and serve copy on the other side. 3 Liberty granted to the applicants to file reply to the said affidavit, if they so desire and serve copy on the other side on or before the next date. 4 Stand over for two weeks. 5 Interim protection, if any, granted earlier to continue till next date. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 12: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 450 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr. Ratnesh Dube i/b Rutuja Ambekar for the applicant. Mr. S.G. Kudle for respondent no.10. CORAM : K. K. TATED, J. DATED : 15/12/2014. P.C.: . Not on board. At the request of Advocate for the respondent no.10, matter is taken on board for urgent orders. 2 Liberty granted to the applicant to serve unserved respondent by private notice either by registered post A.D. and/or by hand delivery and file Affidavit of Service to that effect. 3 Matter to appear on board on 23.12.2014. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 14: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 450 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders r Jud ge's or ders Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr. R.P. Mr. R.P. Raghuvanshi i/b R.A. Ambekar for the i/b R.A. Ambekar for the applicant. Mr. S.G. Kudle for the respondent no.10. Ms. Jyotsna Pandi & P.S. Gujar for Union of India. CORAM : K. K. TATED, J. DATED : 23/12/2014. P.C.: . Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2 The learned counsel for the appellant submits that Appellant no.1 Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav expired yesterday i.e. 22.12.2014. Hence, he requires some time to take appropriate steps for bringing her legal heirs on record. 3 On his request, matter adjourned to 19.01.2015. 4 Interim protection, if any, granted earlier to continue till next date. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 450 OF 2014 Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav and Ors. Applicants : V/S : Dnyaneshwar Vishnu Kate and Ors. Respondents * * * * * Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi a/w. Mr. Ratnesh Dube i/by. Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. S.G. Kudle, Advocate for respondent no.10. Mrs. Jyotsna Pandhi with Mr. P.S. Gujar, Advocate for respondents no.21 to 25. Mr. Rajan Pawar, AGP for respondents no.26 and 27. * * * * * * Coram :- Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. 11th February, 2015. P.C. :- 1). Adjourned for reply of the Government to 25th February, 2015. Copy of the affidavit-in-reply shall be furnished in advance to the appellant and other respondents. (SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J)

Order - Status 23: Chittewan 1/5 C.A.1021-14 O.O. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.450 OF 2014 Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav and ors. .. Applicants/ Appellants (Org.Plaintiffs) V/s Dnyaneshwar Vishnu Kate and Ors. .. Respondents. (Org.Defendants) AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 170 OF 2015 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1021 OF 2014 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.450 OF 2014 R.N. Yadav @ Dhariya .. Applicant (Org.Respondent No.10) In the matter between Smt. Bhagirathi Haribhau Yadav and ors. .. Applicants/ Appellants (Org.Plaintiffs) V/s Dnyaneshwar Vishnu Kate and Ors. .. Respondents. (Org.Defendants) Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi a/w Ratnesh Dube i/b Ms Rutuja Ambekar, for Applicants. Mr. S.G. Kudle, for Respondent No.10. Mrs. Jyotsna Pandhi with Mr. P.S. Gujar, for Respondents No.21 to 25. Mr. Rajan Pawar, AGP for Respondents No.26 and 27. Coram : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. Date : 25th March, 2015 P.C. This is a common order on the above two Civil Applications. Civil Application No.1021 of 2014 is taken out by the appellants for interim injunction to restrain respondent No.1 from dealing with or developing one of the suit properties i.e. the land at Survey No.119/2B of Pimple Saudagar, pending the disposal of the Second Appeal. Civil Application No.170 of 2015 is taken out by respondent No.10 for clarification that the adinterim order dated 08th October, 2014 passed on the Civil Application of the appellants is no more in operation in view of the subsequent order dated 12th December, 2014. The other relief sought by respondent No.10 is to direct the appellants to file an undertaking in the form of bank guarantee to the effect that in the event respondent No.10 succeeds in the appeal, the appellants will compensate him for the losses suffered on account of delay in the decision in the Second Appeal. The Second Appeal arises out of the suit filed by the appellants for partition of the joint family properties. The appeal was admitted on 06th August, 2014 with observations that prima facie it appears that there was no reason for the Appellate Court to exclude properties at Survey No.119/2B and 18/7 from partition and separate possession. These two properties are claimed to have been purchased by respondent No.10 from respondent No.1 by the sale deed dated 09th June, 1983. The Lower Appellate Court has recorded a finding that the properties had been owned jointly by Vishnu, Laxman and Mahadev. Respondent No.1 is the son of Vishnu. In view of this factual position, the Second Appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law : Whether the appellate Court was right in excluding Survey No.119/2B and 18/7 from the partition and separate possession ? Whether learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.10 waives service of the notice ? It appears that during pendency of the proceedings, some portion of the properties came to be acquired by Government of India. Therefore, by order dated 08th December, 2014, the appellants were directed to amend the Civil Application to implead the concerned parties. Accordingly, amendment was carried out and seven persons were impleaded to the Civil Application. They are (1) Union of India, (2) Director General, Defence Estate, (3) Principal Director, Defence Estate, (4) Defence Estate officer, Southern Command, (5) Commanding Officer, Southern Command, (6) State of Maharashtra and (7) The Collector of Pune. The interim relief in operation during pendency of the suit was direction to respondent No.10 to maintain statusquo in respect of the properties at Survey No.119/2B and 18/7. This order has been continued with observation that if respondent No.10 is allowed to deal with the properties or carry out the construction, the same would lead to further complication which should be avoided. Mr. Kudgle, the learned advocate for respondent No.10 submits that the order dated 23rd December, 2014 passed this Court, is no longer in operation since the same has not been specifically continued. He also submits that respondent No.10, who had purchased the properties as far back as in the year 1983 is unable to enjoy the properties purchased by him. Considering the nature of the substantial questions of law framed, properties in question need to be preserved in the same condition during pendency of the Second Appeal. Hence, the Civil Application No.1021 of 2014 is allowed and Civil Application No.170 of 2015 is dismissed. (Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J.)