MANTRI BUILDING CONDOMINIUM Vs. MANTRI BUILDING CONDOMINIUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No.1-Condominium has filed the present Application seeking rejection of Plaint under the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (the Code). According to Applicant-Defendant No.1, the Suit is hopelessly barred by limitation as the same challenges Declaration dtd. 1/10/2004 and Deeds of Apartment dtd. 4/11/2004, 6/11/2004, 10/11/2004 and 6/10/2005 and Deeds of Transfer dtd. 1/2/2005.

(2.) Plaintiffs' case as pleaded in the Plaint is that they are children of late Mr. Sharad Madhavrao Gangla. By an Indenture dtd. 22/3/1921, Bombay Improvement Trust granted lease of land admeasuring 732.45 sq.mtrs bearing Plot No.61, Scheme No.4 of Gamdevi Estate and Cadastral Survey No.1655 of Girgaon Division together with building thereon known as 'Mantri Building' comprising of ground plus two upper floors and having 17 units (16 residential units and one commercial unit) situated at Street No.56, Gamdevi Road, Mumbai-400 007 in favour of Mr. Ramchandra Bhaskar Mantri. The lease was granted for a term of 999 years commencing from 4/11/1916. By Deed of Assignment dtd. 18/5/1925, said Mr. Ramchandra Bhaskar Mantri and others assigned and transferred leasehold rights in the land and the building in favour of Plaintiffs grandfather Mr. Madhavrao Vithalrao Gangla.

(3.) According to the Plaintiff, the land and the building was always joint family property and under Deed of Partition dtd. 18/12/1940 executed between great grandfather (late Vithalrao Sambhaji Gangla), grandfather (late Madhavrao Gangla) and father of the Plaintiffs (Sharad Gangla) and other family members, undivided half share and interest in the entire land and building was granted in favour of Plaintiffs' great grandfather, grandfather and father. According to the Plaintiffs, after the death of great grandfather in the year 1945, the grandfather and father of the Plaintiffs became jointly entitled to half share in the land and the building, which continued to remain a joint family property. According to the Plaintiffs, after they were born in the year 1962 (Plaintiff No.2), 1963 (Plaintiff No.3) and 1974 (Plaintiff No.1), they became entitled to share in the joint family property by birth. After the death of the Plaintiffs grandfather in the year 1977, according to the Plaintiffs, Plaintiff No.1 alongwith his father became entitled to half share in the land and the building.