SOIRU KESHAV POROB SAWKAR Vs. NAVDURGA DEVASTHAN BORIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above Appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

(2.) HEARD Shri Sudesh Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant. None for the Respondents, though served.

(3.) BEFORE going into the merits of the contentions raised and considering the submissions of Shri Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, I find that the basic dispute raised by the Appellant is that there is a larger property situated in the Village of Borim which belonged originally to the co -owners which consists of the Appellant and the Respondents. It is further the case of the Appellant that 1/7th share of the property belonged to the Respondent no. 1 and the remaining 6/7th share belonged to the Appellant and the remaining Respondents in the above Appeal. According to the Appellant, 3/14th share in the property belongs to the Appellant whereas the remaining 9/14th share belongs to the remaining Respondent nos. 2 to 6. It is further the case of the Appellant that a substantial portion of the property has been acquired by the Government and, according to him, in view of a private understanding between all the co -owners the share of compensation attributed to his share in the whole property was reduced and as the Appellant was having a house in a portion of the suit property, the said area was left exclusively to belong to the Appellant. It is further the case of the Appellant that to substantiate the said contention, the Appellant wanted to produce the said Award which according to the Appellant conclusively establishes the oral understanding between the parties to that effect.