LAWS(BOM)-2016-2-63

MAHESH ZANGOJI GHOTEKAR Vs. PRAYAS SAKHARE AND ORS.

Decided On February 18, 2016
Mahesh Zangoji Ghotekar Appellant
V/S
Prayas Sakhare And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit.

(2.) The dispute arising out of a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Reliefs Act, pertains to Plot No. 8, Khasra Nos. 62, 69, 71 and 87 of Mouza Ajani in the lay-out Uruvila Cooperative Housing Society, Wardha Road, Nagpur, which was owned by one Smt. Jasabai, the mother of the present applicant, the original plaintiff. The respondent no. 2 Smt. Manjushri Prayas Sakhare is the daughter of Nivrutti, real brother of the plaintiff, and the respondent No. 1 is her husband. In Special Civil Suit No. 104 of 2012 filed by the applicant-plaintiff, the respondents were joined as defendant nos. 1 and 2, as it was alleged that they have forcibly taken possession of the suit premises on 01.09.2011 and the suit was filed on 002012, which was during the period of limitation of six months, about which there is no dispute.

(3.) The applicant-plaintiff alleged that he was in actual possession of the suit block from the year 2006 to 2008 along with his brother Nivrutti and Smt. Umabai, the wife of Nivrutti. The respondent No. 2 Smt. Manjushri, daughter of Nivrutti, was married in the year 2000 with the respondent no. 1 and she started residing separately at her matrimonial house at Sugat Nagar, Nagpur. Nivrutti died on 27.02.2007 and Smt. Umabai, his widow, shifted to her sister's house at Jaywant Nagar Nagpur. After the death of Nivrutti and shifting of Smt. Umabai, the plaintiff was in exclusive possession of the property. The plaintiff also shifted thereafter in the year 2008 from the suit house to Beltarodi, a different locality, where he started residing. The suit block was given by him to one Dr.Dubey, who was in need of it, on the maintenance charges of Rs. 3,500/- per month. Dr.Dubey resided in the suit block from 10.07.2008 to 31.08.2011 and paid the maintenance charges of Rs. 3,500/- per month to the plaintiff. On 01.09.2011, the respondents-original defendants entered the suit house forcibly and started occupying it. These facts are not in dispute.