Madhukar Banderao Joshi, Died Thr. L.Rs. Sunanda And ORS v. Bhaskar Venkatrao Joshi And ORS

(Order) (1) Second Appeal No. 0635 of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

Second Appeal No. 0635 of 2013 District : Jalna Madhukar Banderao Joshi, Died through L.Rs., A] Sunanda Madhukar Joshi, Age : 70 years, Occupation : Household.

B] Prashant Madhukar Joshi, Age : 50 years, Occupation : Business.

C] Shirish Madhukar Joshi, Age : 47 years, Occupation : Agriculturist.

D] Shrikant Madhukar Joshi, Age : 44 years, Occupation : Agriculturist .. Appellants & service.

(Original plaintiffs) All are residents of Nariman Nagar, Railway Station Road, Jalna.

E] Suchitabai w/o. Satish Takarwankar, Age : 48 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. Rahul Niwas, Diwan Deodi, Aurangabad.

versus

1. Bhaskar Venkatrao Joshi, Died through L.Rs.,

(Order) (2) Second Appeal No. 0635 of 2013 1-A] Mrs. Swati Milind Vazarkar, Age : 40 years, Occupation : Household work, R/o. Ganeshnagar, Near 'Y' Point, Behind IIT, Nanded, .. Respondents Dist. Nanded.

[Original defendants]

2. Shubhangi w/o. Bhaskar Joshi, Age Major, Occupation Household.

3. Hemant s/o. Bhaskar Joshi, Age Major, Occupation Service.

4. Sanjay s/o. Bhaskar Joshi, Age Major, Occupation Student.

All are residents of Gandhi Chaman, Near Shesh Maharaj Gondikar, Double Gym, Old Jalna, Jalna.

...........

Mr. P.S. Paranjape, Advocate, holding for Mr. R.J. Godbole, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. J.C. Badve, Advocate, for respondents no.01 to 04.

...........

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.

DATE : 01ST APRIL 2019 ORAL ORDER :

01.

Seen the order dated 14th March 2019.

Today, the matter was kept for taking instructions by the learned Advocate appearing for the appellants, as to whether the appellants intend to withdraw the

(Order) (3) Second Appeal No. 0635 of 2013 second appeal or want to go ahead with the matter. This was with the background that the suit was filed for injunction only and thereafter he has filed suit for partition and separate possession.

02.

Learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that now interest of his client is protected as he has filed substantive suit and, therefore, this matter has practically become infructuous.

03.

Taking into consideration the subsequent event of filing a substantive suit by the appellants and the present second appeal was challenging the order in respect of suit for injunction, definitely it has become infructuous and, therefore, the second appeal is disposed of accordingly.

( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi ) JUDGE ...........

puranik / SA635.13