Maria Adelaide Pereira And ANR v. Peter Savio Lourenco Represented By His Attorney Jainita Madkaikar E Lourenco And ANR
Suchitra9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.49/2024 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.28/2024 MARIA ADELAIDE PEREIRA& ANR.
... APPLICANTS
Versus
PETER SAVIO LOURENCO REPRESENTED BY HIS ATTORNEY JAINITA MADKAIKAR E LOURENCO & ANR.
... RESPONDENTS Mr S. Redkar with Mr K. Desai, Advocates for the Applicants. Mr J. J. Mulgaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.2. WITH SECOND APPEAL NO.1778/2024 (F) PETER SAVIO LOURENCA REPRESENTED BY HIS ATTORNEY JANITA MADKAIKAR E LAURENCO & ANR. ... APPELLANTS
Versus
MARIA ADELAIDE PEREIRA AND ANR. ... RESPONDENTS Mr J. J. Mulgaonkar, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr S. Redkar with Mr K. Desai, Advocates for the Respondents.
CORAM:
M. S. KARNIK, J.
DATED:
7th FEBRUARY 2025 P.C. :
1.
Heard Mr S. Redkar, learned counsel for the applicants in Civil Application No.49/2024. his is an application for stay of
Judgment and Decree dated 07.11.2023 passed by the Appellate Court. he appeal by the plaintif as well as the appeal by the defendant is admitted.
2.
he original defendant has iled this application seeking stay of the execution and implementation of the decree. By the said decree the First Appellate Court has directed the appellants to hand over a portion of the land to the plaintif which according to the indings of the Appellate Court is the encroached portion. Since the appeal has been admitted and as the appellants are in possession, I am inclined to stay the Judgment and Decree so far as the alleged encroached portion in respect of which the appellants are in possession. Learned counsel for the appellants on instructions submitted that an undertaking will be iled within a period of one week from today stating that there shall be no further encroachment and they will restrict their possession to the portion in respect of which the decree is made. he statement is accepted.
3.
Further, the learned counsel for the respondent/original plaintif submits that as now there is a decree in favour of the plaintif, if the appellants want to continue in possession they must pay suitable compensation in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Atmaram Properties (P) Ltd. v/s. Federal Motors (P) Ltd. - (2005) 1 SCC 705.
4.
Taking an overall view of the matter, in my opinion, the interest of justice will be served if the appellants are called upon and in fact the learned counsel for the appellants on instructions
submitted that the appellants are willing to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month in this Court commencing from 07.11.2023. Subject to such undertaking iled and deposit being made, the impugned Judgment and Decree to the extent the appellants are in possession is stayed.
5.
he appellants to deposit the amount regularly. he arrears to be deposited within a period of four weeks from today. 6.
Civil Application No.49/2024 is disposed of in the above terms.
M. S. KARNIK, J.
Signed by: SUCHITRA NANDAN SINGBAL Designation: Personal Assistant Date: 07/02/2025 15:05:51