TIKKAMCHAND RAMVILAS GILDA Vs. JANKIBAI PYARELAL SHRIVAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree passed on 25.9.2001 by the Joint District Judge, Amravati in Regular Civil Appeal No. 21/1995 filed against the judgment and decree passed on 26.10.1994 in Regular Civil Suit No. 402/1990 by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati, thereby dismissing the appeal and confirming the decree passed by the trial Court.

(2.) The appellant is the grand daughter in law of the original plaintiff to whom the suit property, which is a shop situated in a building popularly known as Mathuradas building, Amravati, was bequeathed by the original plaintiff. Deceased respondent nos.1 and 2 were original defendant nos.1 and 2 and remaining respondents were substituted as defendant nos. 3(1) to 3(4) after the original defendant no. 3. Nandalal Pyarelal Shrivas died during the pendency of the suit, they being legal representatives in the capacity as widow and children of said Nandalal respectively. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereto are being referred to as the plaintiffs and defendants.

(3.) It was the case of the original plaintiff Gangabai Gilda that she became owner of the joint half share in the building popularly known as Mathuradas building situated on Nazul plot bearing Nos. 21/50, 21/51 and 21/52 of sheet No. 56- A in Ward No. 26(new) bearing Municipal Corporation House No. 271 and 272 by virtue of an auction sale dated 2.3.1960 held in execution of a decree passed in her favour to the extent of half share in the said building in a mortgage suit. There was a challenge made to the said sale by the defendants in the mortgage suit and litigation went up to Supreme Court. Auction sale was confirmed by the Supreme Court by the Judgment and decree passed on 9.4.1974. It was averred that plaintiff was already put in possession of the suit property by the Court on 25.11.1960 and this sale became absolute after it was confirmed on 9.4.1974. However, the joint half share in the said building came to be defined and separated later on when there was a compromise decree passed by Additional District Judge, Amravati on 21.8.1987 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 234/1980. The portion that came to be allotted to the plaintiff in the compromise decree encompassed within it the shop in possession of the defendants and this property, hereafter called as "suit property", is the subject matter of the present dispute between the parties.