MADHUKAR BHOLARAM HATWALNE Vs. YESHWANT BHOLARAM HATWALNE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal is filed by the legal representatives of original defendant. The plaintiff and defendant were real brothers. Both have expired during pendency of the suit. The litigation is contested by their respective legal representatives. The legal representatives of plaintiff and defendant will hereinafter referred to as 'respondents and defendants' respectively.

(2.) The plaintiff had filed a suit against the defendant for possession of half portion of plot No.7 admeasuring 5040 sq. ft. situated in Survey No.3 Mouze Malkapur, Tq. and District Akola. It is the case of the plaintiff that the had purchased the said plot No.7 vide registered sale-deed dtd. 17/11/1981 and that because his brother wanted to construct a house half portion of the said plot (25.5. sq. ft. X 80 sq. ft.) was allowed to be utilized for construction of residential house. Half portion of this plot in the possession of defendant is the suit property. He states that his brother/defendant had agreed to vacate the same by removing construction as and when required. The plaintiff issued notice dtd. 01/11/1998 to the defendant revoking the licence w.e.f. 30/11/1998.

(3.) The defendant issued reply notice contending that the plot was purchased in the name of plaintiff although he had contributed half of the amount of consideration for purchase of said plot. It is stated that the plot belongs to a Cooperative Society of which plaintiff was member and therefore, the said plot was purchased in the name of the plaintiff. In the alternate, the defendant claimed ownership over the suit property by way of adverse possession claiming that he was in occupation of the house constructed over the suit property claiming ownership over the same for a period of more than 12 years. A further contention was raised in the alternative that since the licence was given for making building construction, the licence was irrevocable and therefore, the plaintiff was not entitled to decree for possession. The defendant claimed that since he had contributed towards purchase price for suit plot the plaintiff had executed an unregistered Gift-deed dtd. 16/08/1998 with respect to the suit property. The written statement of defendant is on the same lines.