Ankush Namdeo Kalhane And Another v. Namdeo Shankarsa Kalhane And Others

2024:BHC-NAG:11088 1 wp 5340.24.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Writ Petition No.5340/2024 (Ankush and another V Namdeo and others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. P.R. Agrawal, Advocate for petitioners.

Mr. P.N. Shende, Advocate for respondent no.5. CORAM : N.R. Borkar, J.

DATE : 09-09-2024.

.

This petition takes exception to the order dated 20-06-2024 passed by the learned District Judge-3, Amravati (below Exhibit-64) in Regular Civil Appeal No.170/2014.

ii.

The above appeal arises out of the suit filed by the petitioners for partition.

iii.

By the order impugned, the learned District Judge has rejected the application filed by the present petitioners for amendment of the plaint.

iv.

The proposed amendment reads thus :

"PROPOSED AMENDMENT i) Insert the Following para 10F

2 wp 5340.24.odt 5.

That in view of the judgment reported in Vineeta Sharma Vs. Rakesh Sharma AIR 2020 SC 3717, so far as the share of the plaintiffs and the defendants no.2 to 4 in suit properties each had equal share as under:- Name Married on/died on Share Plaintiff No.1 Married in 1987 16.66% Plaintiff No.2 Married in 1922 16.66% Plaintiff No.3 Married in 1994 16.66% Defendant No.2 Married in 1962 16.66% Defendant No.3 Married in 1981 16.66% Defendant No.4 Married in 1992 16.66% Total 100% That suit properties are the ancestral joint Hindu family coparcenary property and the shares of the plaintiffs and defendants no.2 to 4 in the suit properties are as mentioned above."

v.

In a suit for partition or an appeal arising out of such suit, irrespective of rival claims of the parties about the share in the suit properties, it is the duty of the Court to determine the shares of the parties in accordance with the law. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain the present petition against the order impugned. The petition is dismissed.

(N.R. Borkar, J. ) Deshmukh