RUPO THANU BHOMKAR Vs. SAZU BONDU BHOMKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Amey Kakodkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants and Shri Shivan Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents.

(2.) THE above Appeal came to be admitted by an Order dated 11.02.2009, on the following substantial questions of law :

(3.) ON the other hand, Shri Desai, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, has pointed out that the right of the Appellants, if at all, is restricted to one half of the property and by no stretch of imagination can the whole property belong to the Appellants. Learned Counsel further pointed out that the Respondents have disputed the authenticity of the Will and, as such, as the Will itself is a nullity, the question of claiming any such right on the basis of such Will does not arise. Learned Counsel further pointed out that the Respondents have a residential house in the property which is in their occupation and, as such, the question of the Appellants in any event dispossessing the Respondents of the residential house without recourse to law or seeking a partition, is not justified. Learned Counsel has thereafter taken me through the impugned Judgment and pointed out that the learned Judge has rightly appreciated the material on record and has come to the conclusion that the Will itself is a nullity and, as such, no interference is called for in the impugned Judgment.