SHREEDHAR SADASHIVE BHALEKAR Vs. TARABAI SADASHIV BHALEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment. Both the appeals are filed by the original defendant. In a suit for declaration, partition and possession of plaintiffs share, applications at Exh.5 for injunction and Exh.6 for appointment of Receiver were taken out by the plaintiffs. It was alleged by the plaintiffs that the defendant was adopted at son of deceased Sadashiv and plaintiff No.1 is the widow of Sadashiv. It was further alleged that the defendant in the capacity as adopted son is encumbering and disposing of the property which would adversely affect the properties left behind by deceased Sadashiv. Plaintiff No.1 has claimed 1/3rd share in the suit property whereas plaintiff Nos.2 to 6 together have claimed 1/3rd share in the suit property.

(2.) I have gone through the impugned order. It appears that there is no dispute that the defendant is adopted son of deceased Sadashiv. On appreciation of the material as placed before the learned Judge, he has upheld the contention of the plaintiffs that there is a mis-management of properties at the instance of the defendant. From the defence taken by the defendant, it is apparent that he is claiming to be the full owner of the properties though it is an admitted position that the properties are self acquired properties of deceased Sadashiv. If that be so, then a very fact that the defendant is trying to set up the claim which is inconsistent with the family arrangement. That by itself is a sufficient ground to appoint Receiver in respect of the properties as is rightly done by the trial Court.