RAMESH ANANDRAO SHIRKE Vs. KASHINATH ANNA JAIGUDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants call in question legality of the common Judgment and Order dtd. 13/4/2022 passed by Ad-hoc District Judge - 01 Satara in Regular Civil Appeal Nos. 384 of 2012 and 385 of 2012. The First Appellate Court has allowed both Appeals and has set aside the common Judgment and Decree dtd. 29/6/2012 passed by Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Wai in Regular Civil Suit Nos. 228 of 1994 and 273 of 1995. The First Appellate Court has declared that possession of the Appellants over the suit property is unlawful and it has directed the Appellants to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property to the Respondents. Further direction is issued for enquiry into mense profit as per Order 20 Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) Since cross suits were filed by the contesting parties, Ramesh Anandrao Shirke is referred to as Plaintiff (whose heirs are Appellants in these Appeals) and Kashinath Anna Jaigude is referred to as the Defendant (whose heirs are Respondents in these Appeals).

(3.) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the property bearing City Survey No. 2463 admeasuring 275.9 sq. mtrs. along with the constructed house thereon at Siddhantwadi Wai, Tal. Wai, District Satara (suit property) was originally owned by Babaji Dattatraya Devkule. It is Plaintiff's case that Grandmother Radhabai Bhiku More was a tenant of Babaji Dattatraya Devkule on the monthly tenancy of Rs.10..00 Radhabai had a daughter named Shantabai and Plaintiff - Ramesh Anandrao Shirke is the son of Shantabai. This is how Plaintiff claims tenancy in respect of the suit property, which includes a house constructed thereon.