(1.) The present appeals have been filed against the orders [dtd. 10/9/2014 in FA NO.285/2012 and 24/4/2015 in MCA No.1222/2014 in FA No.295/2012] passed by the High Court [High Court of Bombay at Nagpur], vide which the order [dtd. 27/2/2012 in Special Civil Suit No.1017 of 1994] passed by the Trial Court [4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur] was set aside by the learned Single Judge.
(2.) Briefly stating the facts of the case are that a civil suit was filed by Sheela widow of Narendra Fiske for declaration, partition and separate possession of the family property. In the aforesaid suit, counter claim was filed by the defendant nos.1, 4 to 8. The preliminary decree was passed by the Trial Court on 27/2/2012 determining the shares of the plaintiff and defendant nos.1 to 8. The defendants were restrained from alienating the suit property till partition takes place by metes and bounds. The preliminary decree passed by the Trial Court was not challenged by the plaintiff and defendant nos.1 to 8. Defendant no.9-appellant herein was held to be having no right, title or claim in the suit property. The defendants were directed to demolish the construction raised in violation of the Municipal Laws. It is the aforesaid preliminary decree which was challenged only by the defendant no.9, namely, the present appellant before the High Court. The appeal was dismissed, while modifying the operative part of the order of the Trial Court only to the extent that the defendant nos.2 and 9 were directed to demolish the construction on the suit plot forthwith.
(3.) The issue was sought to be raised only by the appellant, who is not a member of the family as such but is claiming his rights through some of the co-sharers. The plea of the appellant was that the respondent no.2 " " Chandrashekhar Deshmukh had transferred his share to him with the partition of the property amongst the plaintiff and defendant nos.1 to 8, his rights are adversely affected as he has spent huge amount in raising construction on the plot.