Lata Raut Wd/O Surendra Raut And ORS v. Shri Sudhir Janardhan Raut And ORS

914.nms.1055.2016 s.2406.2005.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1055 OF 2016 IN SUIT NO. 2406 OF 2005 Lata Raut Wd/o Surendra Raut & Ors.

.. Applicants In the matter between :

Lata Raut Wd/o Surendra Raut & Ors.

.. Plaintiffs Vs.

Shri Sudhir Janardhan Raut & Ors.

.. Defendants Mr.Chandrakant N. Chavan for plaintiff/applicant. Mr.J.M. D'silva for defendant no.2.

CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J.

DATE : 16TH APRIL, 2016 P.C.

In the order dated 18th March 2016, while marking the documents at serial no.28, it is stated that "Counsel for defendant No.2 states that he has not signed this document and the signature is forged". Shri D'silva, counsel for defendant no.2 states that his objection to the document was not that it was forged and therefore, this sentence in the order can be deleted. Therefore, the following sentence in the order dated 18th March 2016 at paragraph 1 against Sr.No.28 is deleted :- "Counsel for defendant No.2 states that he has not signed this document and the signature is forged"

Shraddha Talekar PS 1/2

914.nms.1055.2016 s.2406.2005.doc In the order dated 18th March 2016, the name of the Commissioner to read as Mr.Nilesh Khandare.

The order stands corrected accordingly.

Rest of the order remains unaltered.

In view of the above, notice of motion bearing No.1055 of 2006 stands disposed.

Shri D'silva, at this stage, states that the defendants are also relying on the documents relied upon by the plaintiff and therefore, subject to the adjudication before the Stamp Authorities and payment of necessary stamp duty, this document can be exhibited. Therefore, the document which is marked as X-8 for identification is received in evidence and marked Exh.P28. (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Shraddha Talekar PS 2/2