RAMUBAI KRISHNA PATIL Vs. BARKI BHURYA PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the Counsel for the parties, heard finally.

(2.) This Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India calls in question the legality, propriety and correctness of the order dtd. 15/5/2015 passed by the learned District Judge in Civil Appeal No.264 of 2023, whereby the application preferred by the Petitioners-Appellants seeking permission to adduce additional evidence under the provisions of Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 came to be rejected.

(3.) Ramubai Krishna Patil, predecessor in title of the Petitioners, had instituted a suit, being Special Civil Suit No.203 of 1996, asserting, inter alia, that Thotya Appa Gaikar was the original holder of the lands bearing Survey Nos.371, Hissa No.2, 383, Hissa Nos.1 and 2/B, 444, Hissa Nos.2/3/4/6, 382, Hissa No.7, 383 Hissa No.3, 454 Hissa No.1, 419, Hissa No.9 and 383 Hissa No.5 (suit properties). Changibai was the wife of Thotya Appa Gaikar. Ramubai was born to Changibai by Thotya. Apart from Ramubai, there was no legal heir of Thotya. Defendant Nos.1 to 6 had no concern or relationship with Thotya. Defendant Nos.1 to 6 falsely claimed that they were the legal heirs of Thotya. In connivance with the Officers of the revenue department, Defendant Nos.1 to 6 got their names mutated to the record of rights of the suit properties. Eventually, those properties were acquired. Defendants have illegally and fraudulently obtained the benefit of acquisition of the suit lands and the plots of land in lieu of the acquisition of the lands have been unlawfully allotted to Defendant Nos.1 to 6.