All First Appeal

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUTION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Appeal From Order no.8l of 2006 with Civil Application No.88 of 2006 -------------------------------------------------- Office Notes,Office Court or Judge's Order Memorandum of Coram appearence,Court's Orders & Directors and Registrar's Order Mr P.S.Dani for appellants CORAM; A.M.KHANWILKAR J. DATED 2.2.2006 P.C. . Issue notice returnable on 2.5.2006 . In addition, the appellants shall serve the concerned respondents by advocate's notice, either personally or by courier/speed post/ e-mail/fax and file an affidavit of service before the returnable date. . Status quo with regard to the suit property to be maintained by the parties till 2.5.2006.

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.81 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.88 OF 2006 ------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memorandum Court's or Judge's of Coram appearance, court's Orders. orders or direction and Prothonotery's orders. ------------------------------------------------------------ CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE : 18TH APRIL, 2006. P.C. : Matter was called out in the morning session when request for keeping back the matter is made at the instance of Mr.Dani. But due to paucity of time, it will not be possible to take up this matter today. Stand over to 8th June, 2006. Ad-interim order, if any, to continue till then.

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.81 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.88 OF 2006 Shri Katch Kadva Patidar Samaj Panvel ... Appellant Vs. Pen Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd. & Anr. ... Respondents Mr. P.S. Dani for the Appellant. Mr. G.S. Godbole for the respondent No.2. CORAM : : A.M. KHANWILKAR, J. DATED : : 8TH JUNE, 2006. P.C.: - Heard counsel for the parties. After hearing counsel for the parties, I was inclined to place this matter for final disposal. However, counsel for Respondent No.2 submits that instead of keeping the matter pending before this court, Respondent No.2 is willing to abide by the arrangement that he will not create any third party interest in the suit property or for that matter in the structure to be erected on the suit plot by him till the disposal of the suit pending before the trial court. Respondent No.2, however, submits through counsel that the construction of the structure may not be interdicted on condition that the same will be done by Respondent No.2 entirely at his risk, costs and consequences and Respondent No.2 shall not claim any equity whatsoever at the later stage of the proceedings. Respondent No.2 undertakes through counsel before this Court that in the event the Appellant succeeds before the trail court and if the trial court so directs, Respondent No.2 shall forthwith remove the structure at his own costs and consequences. Respondent No.2 is present in the court and has instructed his advocate to make this statement. The arrangement suggested by Respondent No.2, in my opinion, is a fair arrangement. In the circumstances, instead of going into the contentions which have been raised in the present appeal, in my opinion, it is in the interest of justice to accept the offer given by Respondent No.2 and direct the trial court to decide the suit expeditiously in any case by end of December, 2006. Parties through their counsel assure before this court that they will extend full cooperation for early disposal of the suit and will not seek adjournment on any count whatsoever. The order passed by the trial court stands modified to the above extent. Appeal and accompanying civil application is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. (A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3261 OF 2005. IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2490 OF 2004. IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.18649 OF 2004. Mr.Rajesh Vinayak Sawant : : Complainant versus Shri Ramachandra Ganesh Barve : : Respondent/. & ors. Applicants. Mr.S.B.Shetye for the Appellant/Complainant Ms.Pallavi Joshi i/by R.Bhargavan for Respondent No.2/Applicant. CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE,J. DATED : 13th September 2005. ORAL ORDER This application is filed by the original respondent for setting aside the order dated 10th 1 June 2005 which came to be passed in the application for condonation of delay and by which the delay was condoned. Counsel for the responden,t now applicant in this application, contended that even though the respondents were served, there advocate was busy some-where-else and, therefore, that order was required to be set aside. This is not a ground for setting aside the order. In any case that order was passed on merits in that application. It is open to the applicant/respondent to challenge that order in the appropriate proceedings. This civil application is dismissed. [D.G.DESHPANDE,J]

Order - Status 4: ssm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1967 OF 2007 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Court's or Judge's Orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr.P.N.Joshi for the appellant. CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. DATED : 25th July, 2007 P.C. Issue notice, returnable within two weeks. The private notice is also permitted. [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]

Order - Status 6: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE FIRST APPEAL NO.1967 OF 2007 (SERIAL NOS.45) Coram : Anoop V.Mohta,J Date : 8th August, 2007. PC After service. (Anoop V.Mohta,J)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FARAD CONTINUNATION SHEET FIRST APPEAL NO.1967 OF 2007 ............................................................. Office Notes,Office memorandum of Coram, appearances,Court's Court's or orders or directions Judge's orders & Registrar's orders. ............................................................. Mr.P.N.Joshi for the Appellant CORAM: A.S.OKA, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 30,2007. P.C.: Admit. Hearing is expedited. Printing is dispensed with. The Appellant to implead Gram Panchyat,Dahegaon as a party Respondent. Requisite number of copies of Private Paperbooks along with Decree Forms shall be filed by the Appellant within a period of one year from today. If compliance is not made within stipulated time, the Appeal shall stand dismissed for want of prosecution without further reference to the court. JUDGE

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.544 OF 2006 IN S.C.SUIT NO.2483 OF 2004 Malik Mohd.Qasim Noor Mohammed ...Appellant Versus Ammar Hussain Taqdir Shaikh & Anr. ...Respondents ...... Mr.A.S.Uraizee with Mr.M.V.Singh for Appellant. Mr.A.H.Fernandes for Respondents. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. JULY 26, 2006. P.C. As the question raised in this Appeal is pure question of law and Counsel for the Respondents fairly accepts that there is no direct Judgment of this Court, issue notice for final disposal. Mr.Fernandes waives notice for Respondents. List on 18th October 2006. Interim protection granted earlier to continue till the next date of hearing. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 544 of 2006 Malik Mohd.Qasim Noor Mohammed .. Appellant versus Ammar Hussan Taqdir Shaikh .. Respondent ... Mr.A.S. Uraizee for the appellant. Mr. A.H. Fernandes for respondent nos.1 and 2. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 18th October 2006 P.C.: Mr.Uraizee learned counsel for the appellant reports no instructions and states that the appellant has taken away the papers from him. In order to give one more opportunity to the appellant, S.O. to 7th November 2006 for hearing on admission. (D.G. KARNIK, J)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 544 OF 2006 Shri Malik Mohd.Qasim Noor Mohammed. .. Appellant Versus Shri Ammar Hussain Taqdir Shaikh & Anr. .. Respondents Mr. A.H. Fernandes for respondent nos.1 & 2. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 17th November 2006 P.C.: ... None present for the Appellant when called. Appeal is dismissed under order 41 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (D.G. KARNIK, J) 1

Order - Status 16: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 544 OF 2006 ======================================================= Office Notes, Office Court's or Judges Orders. Memoranda of Coram, appearances,Court's Orders or directions and Registry's orders. ======================================================= Mr. A.K.Kar for appellant. Mr.A.H.Fernandes for the Respondent 1 & 2. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. DATE : 22nd February 2007. P.C. : As the Appeal is restored by separate order passed today, the same is taken on board by consent of the parties. Counsel appearing for the parties point out that parties have amicably settled the dispute on the terms reduced into writing in the form of Consent Terms. Consent Terms duly signed by the parties and their Advocates tendered and taken on record. Both Counsel submit that the Appeal be disposed of on the basis of the Consent Terms. Order accordingly. Counsel for the Respondents points out that Respondent has deposited certain amount in the lower Court. The appellant has no objectiion if the Respondent were to withdraw that amount. That liberty is given to the respondent in view of the consent given by the appellant. The respondent to apply to the trial Court for withdrawal of the amount/suit which application will be disposed of expeditiously. -- [A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.]

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1822 OF 2009 Gulabidevi Jayantiprasad Santoshi. Versus Appellant. Jayantiprasad Shadalram Santoshi & Ors. Respondents. Mr. A. M. Saraogi for the Appellants. None for the Respondents. I CORAM : A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 3RD DECEMBER,2009. P. C.: Issue notice to respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4, returnable on 11th January, 2010. Humdast permitted. Sd/ (A. A. SAYED, J.) 1

Order - Status 10: vss THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1822 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's order or Directions and Registrar's Orders Court's or Judge's Orders S.N. Fatima h/f A.M. Saraogi for Appellant Ι Mr.S.J. Ghogare for Respondent CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE,J. DATED: MARCH 29, 2010 P.C.: The advocate for the appellant has not supplied the fresh address for serving respondent Nos.3 and 4. S.O. for two weeks. It is made clear that if respondent Nos.3 and 4 are not served within that period, the appeal to stand dismissed against respondent Nos.3 and 4. The advocate for the appellant may also serve them by private notice. Mr.Ghogare appears for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

Order - Status 12: vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1822 OF 2009 Smt.Gulabidevi Jayantiprasad Santoshi ... Appellant V/s. Shri Jayantiprasad Shadalram Santoshi & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.A.M. Saraogi i/b Sayed Nisar Fatima for Appellant Mr.S.J. Ghogare for Respondents CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: APRIL 12, 2010 P.C.: Mr.Ghogare, appearing for the respondents, points out that the impugned judgment in the present first appeal is a common judgment passed in four suits. The appellant had filed First Appeal No.1837 of 2009 in respect of S.C. Suit No.5495 of 2003. That appeal was dismissed on February 26, 2010. The learned advocate therefore submits that the same order must follow in the present appeal. Mr.Saraogi, appearing for the appellant, states that the appellant is filing a review petition in that matter and therefore these appeals should be adjourned. S.O. for four weeks. It is made clear that if the review petition is dismissed, the same order as was passed on February 26, 2010 in First Appeal No.1837 of 2009 will follow in the present appeal.

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1822 OF 2009 IN SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO.5498 OF 2003 ......... Gulabdevi Jayantiprasad Santoshi Appellant Vs. Jayantiprasad Shadalram Santoshi and ors. Respondents Mr.A.M.Saraogi, for appellant. Mr.Sagar Ghogre, for respondents. ......... CORAM: R.G.KETKAR, J. DATE : 7th JUNE, 2010. P.C. : Mr.Saraogi, learned counsel for appellants, states that against the order dated 26th February, 2010 passed in First Appeal No.1837 of 2009 a Review Petition is filed in this Court in the month of April, 2010. He states that he will serve copy of the said review petition on the learned counsel appearing for respondents. 2] The statements are accepted. List the First Appeal after four weeks. In the meantime, learned counsel for appellant will move the appropriate Court for deciding the review petition. S.O. for four weeks.

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1822 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICAITON NOS.2852 and 2853 OF 2009 IN F.A.NO.1822 of 2009 Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders. Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr. A. M. Saraogi, for the appellant. Ms.Anita Patil i/b S.J.Ghogre, for respondent no.1. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 08/12/2010 PC: Heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr Saraogi, learned counsel for the appellant, prays for withdrawal of this appeal with liberty to the appellant to adopt appropriate remedy for redressal of her grievance. The First Appeal is disposed of as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed. While granting liberty, I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on rights of the parties or examined merits of the case. If any such proceedings is filed by the appellant, same may be considered in accordance with law. The civil applications are also disposed of. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)