-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 138 OF 2008 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.335 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.3177 OF 2008 ALONG WITH APPEAL (LODGING) NO. 261 OF 2008 Deepak Bhimrao Khadtale ).. Appellant Versus Ulhas Bhimrao Khadtale and others ).. Respondents Mr. A.Y. Bookwala i/b. Mr. S.A. Vaidya for the Appellant. Mr. S.A. Sawant i/b. Mr. Joseph Fernandes for Respondent No.1. Ms. Rajani Iyer a/w Mr. B.K. Barve i/b. B.K. Barve & Co. for Respondent Nos.2, 4 and 5. Mr. M.S. Menon for Respondent No.3. Mr. R.R. Jaiswal for the Appellant in Appeal (L) No.261/08. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & V.M . KANADE, J. DATE: 9TH JUNE 2008. P.C. It is necessary to note the conduct of the parties before the Court after they had appeared in the present Appeals. When the -2- Appeals were listed for hearing on 2nd June 2008, the learned Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2, 4 and 5 had stated that the market value of the property in question was Rs.50 lakhs and the parties were to negotiate with regard to sale of the share interse for the value of the property in question i.e. Flat No.68. It needs to be noticed that parties have admitted before the trial Court and even before this Court that they have 1/6th share each and the Appellant before this Court has 1/6th share in the property and have been keen to buy the five shares and had even accepted the said shares and agreed to make payment on that basis. 2. However, when the matter was taken up on 4th June 2008, the learned Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2, 4 and 5 stated that the value of the property they were prepared to negotiate was actually Rs.80 lakhs and, therefore, the share of the party be determined at that rate. The learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant had brought the money on that day in Court for buying the flat at Rs.50 lakhs and on subsequent hearing he has brought the money, share being accounted on market value of the property being Rs.80 lakhs. Today again, the learned Counsel appearing for the same Respondents has stated that the value of the property is Rs. 1.05 -3- crores and, therefore, the share should be valued on that basis. We are unable to appreciate this conduct of the said Respondents as they are changing the value every day. Today, the learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.1, stated that they are prepared to buy and/or sell the property at the value of the property being computed as Rs.1.25 crores. This is a matter between the members of the same family who are co-owners in equal shares of the property in dispute. This attitude of fluctuating the market value of the property needs to be deprecated and parties are expected to make statements with proper responsibility before the Court. Looking to undue conduct and particularly of that set of Respondents, we pass the following order :- (a) Parties have admitted that they have 1/6th share each in the property in question. (b) They are willing to pay and/or sell the property interse between themselves. (c) Each one of the share holders i.e. the Appellant, Respondent Nos.2, 4 and 5, Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.3 will deposit a sum of Rs.5 lakhs in this Court within two days from today. (d) Along with the deposit of the amount, they shall put in sealed -4- cover any value in excess of Rs.1.25 crores. The party other than the party giving the higher value shall have the first preference to buy and/or sell his/her share in the property in question. (e) In the event the party which does not deposit Rs.5 lakhs, will not be permitted to participate in the debate. (f) Respondent No.1 who has given a bid of Rs.1.25 crores shall submit a cheque for Rs.5 lakhs during the course of the day. Respondent No.1, who is present in Court, undertakes to deposit the same tomorrow. Still it will be open to the said Respondent to give higher bid if he so wishes in sealed cover. (g) We make it clear that any other party failing to comply with the directions of the Court, shall be liable to be dealt with in accordance with law. 3. After the above order was passed, the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant states that he is instructed by his client's wife, who is present in Court, that they are willing to buy five shares of all the Respondents at additional market value of the property being Rs.1.25 crores. The learned Counsel appearing for all the other Respondents, upon instructions from their clients, who are stated to be -5- present in Court, except the mother who is represented through the Counsel and is staying with one of the daughters, who is present in Court, an undertaking is given to the Court that they are willing to sell the value of their respective shares. 4. A cheque for Rs.13,33,500/- to each of the share holders has been handed over in Court through the Counsel to the respective parties which has been accepted by them without prejudice to their rights or contentions. 5. For payment of the balance money, it is stated by the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant that the balance consideration of each share to the respective share holder shall be paid within two weeks from today. On payment of the said money within two weeks, the title and possession would exclusively vest in the Appellant of Flat No.68. None of the party would have any objection and would request the society to transfer the flat in the name of the Appellant. 6. With the above consent order, undertakings of the parties are accepted. Appeals are disposed of with the above consent order. -6- 7. Upon conclusion of these terms, the appointment order with regard to the Receiver shall stand vacated and even till that date the Receiver shall take no action. 8. Both the Appeals are accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. 9. After compliance of the Order, the matters may be shown on board. CHIEF JUSTICE V.M. KANADE, J.