BHAGIRATHI HARIBHAU YADAV Vs. DNYANESHWAR VISHNU KATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The original plaintiffs are appellants in this appeal and they are dissatisfied with the first Appellate Court i.e. the District Judge-5, Pune, only partly allowing their appeal by judgment and order dtd. 6/2/2014. The Small Causes Court and Court of Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Pune had dismissed the suit of the appellants in its entirety. The first Appellate Court partly decreed the same. But, according to the appellants, the suit ought to have been allowed in its entirety, particularly in the context of land at survey No. 119/2B at Mauje Pimple Saudagar, Tal. Haveli, Dist. Pune.

(2.) The proceedings in the present case were contested by original defendant No.10, who is respondent No.10 in this appeal, while the other defendants failed to contest the suit. The four original plaintiffs are the sisters of the original defendant No.1, while defendant No.2 is his wife and defendant Nos.3 and 4 are their children. Defendant Nos.5 to 20 were all purchasers of properties from original defendant Nos.1 to 4.

(3.) The original plaintiffs filed the suit for partition and separate possession of joint family properties specified in the plaint and also for a specific declaration that the documents executed by defendant Nos. 1 to 4 in favour of defendant Nos.5 to 20 were legal and valid only to the extent of share of defendant No.1 and that they were not binding on the shares of the original plaintiffs. As noted hereinabove, the suit was dismissed in its entirety, while the first Appellate Court allowed the appeal by partly decreeing the same in respect of the suit properties, except the properties at survey No. 119/2B and 18/7. During the course of arguments, in this appeal, the learned counsel for the appellants, on instructions, restricted the claim of the appellants (original plaintiffs) only to the property at survey No. 119/2B.