ANYAJI RAGHOBAJI BUNDHADE Vs. VISHWESHWAR RAGHOBAJI BUNDHADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three matters arising between real brothers are to be decided together.

(2.) Insofar as second appeal No. 89 of 2000 is concerned, respondent No. 1 Vishweshwar had filed regular civil suit No. 1578 of 1984 for permanent injunction seeking restraining orders against Maharashtra State Electricity Board from providing electric connection to present appellant Anyaji who according to plaintiff Vishweshwar (respondent No. 1 in the second appeal) was in illegal or unauthorised occupation of the suit premises. The suit was decreed on 04/12/1996 and regular civil appeal filed by present appellant was dismissed on 28/02/2000. Thereafter, this second appeal has been filed. During hearing it has been pointed out that now there is no provision which requires a person in occupation to get no objection of the owner of premises. It was also pointed out that appellant Anyaji has already secured the electric connection. In this circumstance it is apparent that grievance made by Mr. Anyaji against the impugned judgments and decrees does not survive and in fact the claim of present respondent No. 1 Vishweshwar itself is rendered infructuous. In view of this development, this second appeal needs to be disposed of as infructuous. By way of abundant precaution, it is clarified that because of judgment and decrees impugned in this second appeal, so long as appellant Anyaji continued in possession of the premises in dispute, his electric supply cannot be disconnected.

(3.) Present appellant Anyaji filed a suit for partition and separate possession against respondent Vishweshwar and his sister Smt. Yamini Bhaurao Nikhade. The suit came to be opposed by Vishweshwar by pointing out that property of which partition was being sought was his self acquired property except one ancestral house. The trial Court by common judgment dated 04/12/1996 dismissed his suit observing that Anyaji has partly proved his case, and therefore, he is entitled to share in house property at Lodhikheda (M.P.). It also decreed that Vishweshwar also had share in that house. This judgment and decree of the trial Court was challenged by Anyaji by filing regular civil appeal and that appeal No. 86 of 1997 was dismissed again by common judgment delivered on 28/02/2000. Thereafter, this second appeal has been filed and it has been admitted on 24/3/2004 by formulating following question :