MAHESH APPARAO SURYAWANSHI Vs. TULSABAI BHAGWANRAO SURYAWANSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri. Salunke, the learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff, shri. Shah, the learned senior counsel instructed by Shri. Rane, the learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 13 and Shri. N. K. Kakade with Shri. A. N. Kakade, learned advocates for the Respondent Nos. 14 to 18.

(2.) AS per the order of this Court dated 1st June, 2004 notices have been issued to Respondent Nos. 1 to 12 and none appears for them. The Respondent Nos. 7 to 12 have been shown as formal parties. Affidavit in reply has been filed on behalf of Respondent nos. 15 to 18 opposing the petition and thus supporting the impugned order passed by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division at Aurangabad on 21st April, 2004 in Regular civil Suit No. 244 of 2004.

(3.) THE Plaintiff has filed Regular civil Suit No. 244 of 2004 and stated that his grandfather Deorao s/o. Ramrao was the owner of agricultural land in Survey Nos. 6, 9, 10 and 11 of Shahanoorwadi, a suburb of Aurangabad and admeasuring 66 Acres 37 Gunthas. Deorao had two sons by name Bhagwanrao and Apparao and on the demise of Deorao, when Apparao was a minor, the agricultural land came to be mutated in the name of bhagwanrao, the Petitioner's uncle. The petitioner's father was born on 23rd september, 1938 and while he was a minor, of 3 years old, his uncle Bhagwanrao sold 64 acres and 37 Gunthas of land, which was a joint Hindu family property, to late Shri. Tasduq Hussain s/o. Abdul Tayyab, resident of Juna Bazaar for an amount of Rs. 2,500/- in 1941 by a registered sale deed and this sale was illegal and void-ab-initio. The plaintiff came to know of this legal position on 10th february, 2004 and, therefore, he filed the said suit praying for partition, declaration of ownership, possession and perpetual injunction in respect of his half share in the entire land, admeasuring 66 Acres 37 Gunthas which was a joint Hindu family property. He also clarified that the balance about 2 Acres land was still remaining in the ownership of bhagwanrao or his sons, as the case may be, and the Plaintiff was entitled for half share in the same as well. For the purpose of payment of Court fees, he took support of the sale deed signed and registered in 1941 for an amount of Rs. 2,500/- and contended that his half share value, on that basis, worked out to Rs. 1,250/-and, thus, paid the Court fees of Rs. 250/ -.