1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 860 OF 1998 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 860 OF 1998 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 860 OF 1998 WITH WITH WITH CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 861 OF 1998 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 861 OF 1998 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 861 OF 1998 CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 860 OF 1998 Ganeshmal Virchand Sonigara ) Adult, Occupatrion: Service, ) residing at 353, Rasta Peth, Pune- ) 411 011. )..Petitioner (Org.Judgment Debtor No.7) Versus 1) Rahimuthi Allarkhu Bakrasab ) (Since deceased, through Legal ) heirs and representatives) ) 1(a) Abdul Hamid Allarkhu, ) age 68 years, Occupation: Nil ) 2 1(b) Baymabi Budhan Bakrasab ) Age 44 years, Occ: Household ) 1(c) Sunnabai HassanBakrasab, ) Age 62 years, Occ: Household. ) 1(d) Ashabi Kadar Bakrasab ) Age 52 years, Occ: Household. ) Respondents No.1(a) to 1(d) ) all residing at 1527, Babajan ) Chowk, Camp, Pune. ) 2. Ibrahim Mashumbhai, ) (since deceased, through his ) Legal heirs & representatives) ) 2(a) Manibai Ibrahim ) Age 52 years, Occ: Household, ) residing at Kondhwa Khurd, ) Pune 411 048. ) 3. Ibrahim Dadamiya Patel ) (since deceased, through his ) Legal heirs & representatives ) 3(a) Nisar Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, Occupation: Business. ) 3 3(b) Siraj Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, Occupation: Business. ) 3(c) Zahir Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, occupation: Business. ) 3(d) Khalil Ibrahim Patel ) adult, Occupation : Business. ) 3(e) Rashid Ibrahim Patel ) Adult, Occupation: Business. ) 3(f) Mukthar Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, Occupation: Business ) 3(g) Shahid Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, Occupation: Business, ) Respondents No.3(a) to 3(g) ) all residing at 1861, Bhimpura ) Camp, PU*ne 411 001. ) 4. Abdul Hamid Allarkhu, ) Age 68 years, Occ:Nil. ) 5. Daymabi Budhan Bakrasab. ) Deleted as Age: 44 years, Occ: Household ) per Court’s order dated 14.7.07. 6. Sunnabi Hassan Bakasab ) 4 Age 52 years, Occ: Household. ) 7. Ashabi Kadar Bakrasab ) Age 52 years, Occ: Household, ) Respondents Nos. 4 to 7 all ) residing at 1527, Babajan ) Chowk, Camp, Pune 411 001. ) 8. Hastimal Virchand Sonigara ) Age 42 years, Occ: Business, ) residing at 1695, Kadari Road, ) PUne 411 001. ) (Resp.No.1(a) to 1(d) - org. decree holders, Rsp.No.2(a) - org.Judgment Debtor NO.1.Resp.No.3(a) to 3(g) - org. Judgment Debtors Nos.2(a) to 2(g) Resp.Nos.4 to 7 - orig. Judgment Debtors Nos.3 to 6. Resp.No.8 - orig. Judgment Debtor No.8). CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 861 OF 1998 Mr.Hastimal Virchand Sonigara ) Age 42 years Occupatrion: Business ) R/at at 1695, Kedari Road,Pune- ) 411 011. )..Applicant. Versus 1) Rahimuthi Allarkhu Bakrasab ) (Since deceased, through Legal ) heirs and representatives) ) 1(A) Abdul Hamid Allarkhu, ) age 66 years, Occupation: Nil ) 5 1(B) Baymabi Budhan Bakrasab ) Age 42 years, Occ: Household ) 1(C) Sunnabai HassanBakrasab, ) Age 60 years, Occ: Household. ) 1(D) Ashabi Kadar Bakrasab ) Age 50 years, Occ: Household. ) Respondents No.1(A) to 1(D) ) all residing at 1527, Babajan ) Chowk, Camp, Pune. ) 2. Ibrahim Mashumbhai, ) (since deceased, through his ) Legal heirs & representatives) ) 2(A) Manibai Ibrahim ) Age 52 years, Occ: Household, ) residing at Kondhwa Khurd, ) Pune 411 048. ) 3. Ibrahim Dadamiya Patel ) (since deceased, through his ) Legal heirs & representatives ) 3(A) Nisar Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, Occupation: Business. ) 3(B) Siraj Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, Occupation: Business. ) 3(C) Zahir Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, occupation: Business. ) 3(D) Khalil Ibrahim Patel ) adult, Occupation : Business. ) 3(E) Rashid Ibrahim Patel ) Adult, Occupation: Business. ) 3(F) Mukthar Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, Occupation: Business ) 3(G) Shahid Ibrahim Patel, ) Adult, Occupation: Business, ) Respondents No.3(A) to 3(G) ) all residing at 1861, Bhimpura ) Camp, Pune 411 001. ) 4. Abdul Hamid Allarkhu, ) Age 68 years, Occ:Nil. ) 5. Daymabi Budhan Bakrasab. ) Deleted as Age: 42 years, Occ: Household ) per Court’s order dated 14.7.07. 6 6. Sunnabi Hassan Bakasab ) Age 50 years, Occ: Household. ) 7. Ashabi Kadar Bakrasab ) Age 50 years, Occ: Household, ) Respondents Nos. 4 to 7 all ) residing at 1527, Babajan ) Chowk, Camp, Pune 411 001. ) 8. Ganeshmal Virchand Sonigara ) Age about 15 years, Occ: service,) 355, Rasta Peth, ) Pune 411 001. ).. Respondents Mr. Rajesh S.Datar, Advocate, for the applicant in CRA no.860/98. Mr. P.K.Hushing, Advocate for applicant in CRA No.861/98. Smt. S.V.Sonawane, Adocate for Respondent No.1A in CRA No.860/98 & CRA No.861/98. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE: 25th February,2008. DATE: 25th February,2008. DATE: 25th February,2008. JUDGMENT JUDGMENT JUDGMENT 1. The original plaintiff- Rahimatbi had filed Regular Civil Suit No.89 of 1982 claiming partition and her 1/3rd share in the suit property. That suit was decreed. Regular Darkhast No.101 of 1994 was filed by the plaintiff/decree holder for execution of the decree and for her separate 1/3rd share. The judgment debtor Nos. 7 and 8, who are the revision-applicants before this Court, objected to the issuance of possession 7 warrant on he ground that they were in lawful possession of the property on the basis of certain tenancy rights and on the basis of purchase of certain shares from the other shareholdrs. The objection was rejected by the executing Court. Civil Appeal No.94 of 1996 filed by the judgment debtors nos. 7 and 8 also came to be dismissed. Therefore, they have filed these two Revision Applications. 2. As the property is very small and it was found difficult to partition the property and to put the plaintiff/decree holder in separate possession of 1/3rd share, on 2.3.2007 the parties had agreed to settle the matter on the basis of the market value of the property and accordingly, as per order dated 2.3.2007 passed by this Court, the Registrar, District Court,Pune, was directed to appoint one of the approved Government valuers for making valuation report. Accordingly, the valuation was made and valuation report has been submitted by the Government approved valuer - Vaibhav && Shinde. The valuation report is dated 1.6.2007. The valuer has assessed the market value of the property at Rs.18,37,043/-. Even though the report was submitted long back, the Revision Applications are pending and no final order was passed so far. Taking into consideration the fact that the market value of the 8 immovable property in big cities like Mumbai and Pune has substantially increased in last about 2 years, after some discussion and after taking instructions from their respective clients, the learned Counsel agreed that a total amount of Rs.8,50,000/- may be paid to the plaintiff-decree holder towards her 1/3rd share. The original plaintiff is no more alive but her L.Rs. are the respondent Nos.1(a), 1(b), (1c) and 1(d). Respondent No.1(d) is also reported to be dead. Respondent No.1(a) is present in Court. 3. Therefore, with consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, both the Revision Applications stand disposed of with the following directions:- Original Judgment Debtors Nos. 7 and 8, who are the revision-applicants before this Court, shall deposit an amount of Rs.8,50,000/- with the executing Court within six weeks from this day and on the said amount being deposited, the claim of the plaintiff/decree holder in the suit property will come to an end and the decree shall be deemed to have been fully satisfied. If the amount is not deposited within the stipulated period, it shall carry interest at 18% per annum from this day till the amount is deposited or recovered and charge of the same 9 shall be on the suit property. After the amount is deposited, the legal heirs of the original plaintiff/decree holder may withdraw the amount from the executing Court. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.)