Nana @ Vasantrao Narayanrao Ambekar (Dead) Thr. Lrs., Smt. Vijaya Nana @ Vasantrao Ambekar And ORS v. Ramkrushna S/O Maniksa Yelne And Another
WP6744.18 1/2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.6744 OF 2018 Nana @ Vasantrao s/o Narayanrao Ambekar (Dead) through his Legal Heirs : Smt. Vijaya wd/o Nana @ Vasantrao Ambekar and others vs Ramkrushna Maniksa Yelne and another.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
Shri R.D.Karode, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri A.S.Dhore, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 & 2. CORAM : A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.
DATED : June 21, 2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record.
According to the petitioners the trial Court was not justified in directing the plaintiff in R.C.S.No.41/2010 to lead evidence. It is submitted that as the respondents had filed a suit for possession in earlier point of time, the trial Court ought to have directed the plaintiff in R.C.S.No.18/2010 to lead evidence. Reliance is placed on the decision in Zainabee Mohammad Bashir and others Vs.
Shivkumar and another, AIR 2018 (NOC) 709(BOM) in that regard.
WP6744.18 2/2 The aforesaid submissions are opposed by learned counsel for the respondents. It is submitted that since the petitioner is claiming entitlement on the basis of Will deed dated 16.08.1979, the trial Court was justified in passing the impugned order.
On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it is seen that both the suits have been consolidated for a common trial. The plaintiffs in R.C.S.No.18/2010 seek possession of the suit property while the plaintiff in R.C.S.No.41/2018 seeks permanent injunction based on the Will dated 16.08.1979. Considering the nature of issues framed in both the suits, no fault can be found with the impugned interlocutory order directing the plaintiffs in R.C.S. No. 41/2010 to lead evidence. The writ petition is therefore dismissed with no orders as to costs. JUDGE Andurkar.