1 36 cas 1170.09.doc k IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1170 OF 2009 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 115 OF 2009 Laxmibai Kisan Raskar & Ors. ..Applicants. Vs. Taibai Tukaram Raskar & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. S.S.Kumbhar with S.A.Bhagwat for the applicants. Mr. K.S.Dewal for the respondent nos. 1 to 8 and 13. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 08/10/2010. PC: 1 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 In this application, the applicant has made following prayer: “(a) Pending hearing and final disposal of the present Second Appeal by this Hon’ble Court, apportionment of the suit land i.e. Gat No.3819 in satisfaction/execution of the decree dt. 10.7.1987 passed in Civil Suit No.19 of 1984 by Civil Judge (J.D.), Shirur, and actual delivery of possession of portions of the suit land Gat No.3819 amongst the 2 36 cas 1170.09.doc parties entitled be stayed by an appropriate order from this Hon’ble Court in the wake of the relevant provisions contained in The Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, as also in The Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947.” 3 It appears that there was oral partition between members of the family in 1960. In the partition Gat No. 3819 was not partitioned and kept for one Mahadu for his maintenance. Mahadu was father of the predecessors of the present Applicants/Appellants and the Respondents. After the death of Mahadu, the predecessor of the present Respondent-Tukaram filed Regular Civil Suit No.19 of 1984 seeking partition of Gat No. 3819. The suit came to be decreed on 10th July, 1987. Thereafter, the decree was carried in Appeal by the predecessor of present applicants/appellants. That appeal was also dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 10th July, 1987 became final. Thereafter, the respondents/decree holders filed Darkhast No. 7 of 1997. During pendency of the Darkhast, present appellant filed another suit seeking partition of all the properties being Civil Suit No. 871 of 2004. That suit was dismissed and even the appeal filed against the decree also came to be dismissed on 6th 3 36 cas 1170.09.doc December, 2008. Against the judgment and order passed by the appellate court, the appellant filed the present Second Appeal which came to be admitted (R.Y.Ganoo,J) on 28th April, 2009. In this Application the aforementioned prayer is made by the Applicants/Appellants. Having regard over all facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, the prayer, as made in the Civil Application, cannot be granted. Hence, the Civil Application is rejected. 4 Ad-interim order granted earlier stands vacated. (D.B.Bhosale, J.)