IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 15 OF 2008 SHRI. RAMCHANDRA SADASHIV VAINGANKAR AND 4 ORS., ... Petitioners Versus MR. DHONDU SHANKAR VAINGANKAR AND 20 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Prasheen Lotlikar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, Advocate for the Respondents. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO, J. Date:- 18th September, 2008 P.C.: Heard learned Counsel on behalf of both parties. 2. Plaintiffs claim to be the co-owners of the property surveyed under No. 70/13 admeasuring 367 sq. mts. It is the claim of the plaintiffs that inspite of the plaintiffs having been the co-owners of the suit property defendants no. 1 to 20 sold it to defendants no. 21 and 22. Plaintiffs' application for a decree on admission in terms of Order 12, Rule 6 came to be rejected by the learned trial Court by impugned order dated 22/02/2008. Plaintiffs' claim for co-ownership made in para 5 of the plaint has been denied by the said defendants. Shri Lotlikar, the learned Counsel on behalf of the plaintiffs submits that the defendants have admitted that the predecessors in title of the plaintiffs were co-owners in respect of 72 sq. mts. out of 367 sq. mts. of the suit property. Admittedly, the said 72 sq. mts. are unidentifiable. Even if there was such an admission, in my view, the learned trial Court was within its discretion not to grant the prayer of the plaintiffs in terms of Order 12, Rule 6 as the said admission was not with regards to the entire property. 3. In the light of the above, I find there is no merit in this petition, hence the same is hereby dismissed. N. A. BRITTO, J. NH