REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

DINKARRAO GANPATRAO KOTHARE Appellant

V/S

NARAYAN V.MANDLIK Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

FUTTEH CHUND SAHOO V. LEELUMBER SINGH DOSS [REFERRED TO]
SREEMUTTY TRIPOORA SOONDUREE V. JUGGUR NATH DUTT [REFERRED TO]
NOBIN CHANDRA SOOT V. NABAB ALI SARKAR [REFERRED TO]
LONDON AND SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY CO. V. GOMM [REFERRED TO]
BORLAND'S TRUSTEE V. STEEL BROTHERS & CO.,LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
CHUNDI CHURN BARUA V. RANI SIDHESWAMI DEBI [REFERRED TO]
MAUNG SHWE GOH V. MAUNG INN [REFERRED TO]
BAPU APAJI V. KASHINATH SADOBA [REFERRED TO]
WORTHING CORPORATION V. HEATHER [REFERRED TO]
SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY V. ASSOCIATED PORTLAND CEMENT MANUFACTURERS (1900) LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
MAHARAJ BAHADUR SINGH V. BALCHAND [REFERRED TO]
EVANS V. LEVY [REFERRED TO]
WOODALL V. CLIFTON [REFERRED TO]
KOLATHU AYYAR V. RANGA VADHYAR [REFERRED TO]
NABIN CHANDRA SARMA V. RAJANI CHANDRA CHAKRABARTI [REFERRED TO]
KALIMADDIN BHUYA V. REAZUDDIN AHMED [REFERRED TO]
CHARAN DAS VS. AMIR KHAN [REFERRED TO]
RAMASAMI PATTAR V. CHINNAN ASARI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal from the decision of Pratt J. in an Originating Summons.

(2.) THE facts are that, on the 18th September 1878, one Vishvanath Narayan Mandlik conveyed to one Ganpatrao Bhaskar Kothare a plot of vacant land measuring 2843 square yards at Altamont Road for the consideration of Rs. 5,664. This plot formed part of a larger piece of land belonging to the vendor. THE sale-deed was in Marathi and contained certain covenants purporting to reserve for the vendor, his heirs, Vahivatdars and donees certain rights of pre-emption, which covenants have given rise to the present dispute.

(3.) IN 1897, Vinayakrao conveyed inter alia his share in the suit property to his three brothers; consequently that share was held by them as purchasers and not as devisees. The suit property has remained undivided, the persons at present entitled to it being Dinkarrao, Vinayakrao, and Sundrabai as heiress of her surviving son Narayanrao. For the purposes of partition it became necessary to sell the property, so the plaintiffs filed this suit as an Originating Summons in order to have the rights of the first defendant under the sale-deed of 1878 determined by the Court.

Click here to view full judgment.

DINKARRAO GANPATRAO KOTHARE Vs. NARAYAN V MANDLIK

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address