Mr. Shantaram Baburao Malusare v. Mr. Shankar Dadu Malusare And ORS.

902. wp 13649.18.doc Urmila Ingale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 13649 OF 2018 Mr.Shantaram Baburao Malusare .. Petitioner Vs.

Mr.Shankar Dadu Malusare and ors. .. Respondents Mr.Satheesh K.R. for the Petitioner.

CORAM : M.S.KARNIK, J.

DATE : 26th SEPTEMBER 2019 P.C. :

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2.

The order impugned is dated 25/07/2017 passed by the Executing Court rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for setting aside the compromise dated 19/08/2001 recorded in Regular Civil Suit No. 3 of 1997 below Exhibit 63. The petitioner also challenges order passed by the Appellate Court holding that Misc. Civil Appeal against the Executing Courts order dated 25/07/2007 is not tenable. 1/2

902. wp 13649.18.doc 3.

After the matter was argued for some time, learned Counsel for the petitioner on instructions submits that the petitioner is willing to abide by the compromise dated 19/08/2001. His grievance however is that in terms of the compromise the survey that is carried out and the plan for partition prepared by T.I.L.R. is not in consonance with the compromise terms. He has objection to the plan for partition which is prepared. If the petitioner has any grievance regarding the plan prepared by T.I.L.R. as not in conformity with the terms of the compromise, the petitioners are always at liberty to make an appropriate application to the Executing Court which application can be considered by Executing Court on its own merits.

4.

With these observations & with liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application, Petition is rejected.

(M.S.KARNIK, J.) 2/2 Urmila P. Ingle by Urmila P.

Ingle Date: 2019.09.26 18:45:22 +0530