-1- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUNATION SHEET CONTINUNATION SHEET CONTINUNATION SHEET CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1151 OF 2004 APPLICATION NO.1151 OF 2004 APPLICATION NO.1151 OF 2004 IN IN IN FIRST FIRST FIRST APPEAL NO.84 OF 2004 APPEAL NO.84 OF 2004 APPEAL NO.84 OF 2004 ............................................................. ............................................................. ............................................................. Office Notes,Office Office Notes,Office Office Notes,Office memorandum of Coram, memorandum of Coram, memorandum of Coram, appearances,Court’s appearances,Court’s appearances,Court’s Court’s Court’s Court’s or or or orders or directions orders or directions orders or directions Judge’s Judge’s Judge’s orders orders orders & Registrar’s orders. & Registrar’s orders. & Registrar’s orders. ............................................................. ............................................................. ............................................................. Mr.Madhav Jamdar for the Applicant CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : OCTOBER 1,2007. : OCTOBER 1,2007. : OCTOBER 1,2007. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. The learned Advocate for the applicant has tendered on record Affidavit of service along with the acknowledgement signed by the Respondent. The said affidavit is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification. The learned Advocate for the Applicant states that the Respondent has been duly served. 2. The learned Advocate for the Applicant has invited my attention to the impugned Judgment and Order date 16th October 2003. He pointed out that the Applicant and the Respondent are in joint possession of the suit premises. He pointed out that while disposing of the suit, the learned trial -2- Judge has recorded that the Applicant’s sister will be entitled to 1/3rd share and the said Applicant’s sister Kalpana is not a party to the suit. 3. Considering the nature of the impugned order, prayer (a) of the Application deserves to be granted. Prayer (b) also deserves to be granted in view of the averments made in the Application. Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE