Sonali Mane 25-SA-806-2017.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 806 OF 2017 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1576 OF 2017 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 806 OF 2017 Misss Leena Ramesh Bhalerao @ Leena Paul Anthoni … Appellant Versus Patrik Silway (Decd.) Thr. Lrs. Steela Patric Silway & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Aryavrat Dube i/b Mr. S.S. Kulkarni for the Appellant. None for Respondents. CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 9 SEPTEMBER 2026. P.C. : 1) The Appeal challenges Judgment and decree dated 1 September 2017 passed by the Ad-hoc District Judge-1, Pune dismissing the Civil Appeal No. 319 and 2012 and confirming the decree of the Trial Court dated 28 April 1995 passed in Special Civil Suit No. 141 of 1993. While decreeing the suit of Plaintiffs/Respondents, the Trial Court had held ___Page No. 1 of 3 ___ 9 September 2026 MANE SONALI DILIP Digitally signed by MANE SONALI DILIP Date: 2026.09.11 11:29:38 +0530 Sonali Mane 25-SA-806-2017.docx sale deed dated 18 January 1993 to be null and void and not binding on the Plaintiffs. The Appellant/Defendant is directed to hand over possession of the suit flat to the Plaintiffs, in addition to direction for making an enquiry into mesne profits under Order 20 Rule 12(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 2) I have heard Mr. Dube, the learned counsel appearing for Appellant and have considered the submissions canvassed by him. 3) Perusal of the judgments rendered by the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court would indicate that what is conducted by them is a mere factual enquiry into the aspect of actual payment of consideration by the Appellant/Defendant to the Respondents/Plaintiffs. Upon conducting a factual enquiry, both the Courts have concurrently held that not a farthing is actually paid by the Appellant to the Respondents. The case, thus does not involve an eventuality where some consideration is paid and balance consideration remained unpaid. Therefore, the reliance placed by Mr. Dube on judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Raziya Begum and Ors. Vs. Nafisa Begum Abdul Hamid and Ors.1 is inapposite. The present 1 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1511 ___Page No. 2 of 3 ___ 9 September 2026 Sonali Mane 25-SA-806-2017.docx case involves non-payment of even a single rupee by Defendant to the Plaintiffs. In the factual enquiry conducted by the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court, it is concurrently established that no consideration is paid in pursuance of sale deed dated 18 January 1993. The transaction of sale is thus clearly hit by provisions of Section 25 of the Indian Contract Act. The Trial Court and the First Appellate Court have rightly ruled against the Appellant. No substantial question of law is involved in the Appeal. 4) The Second Appeal is accordingly dismissed. 5) In view of dismissal of the Second Appeal, Civil Application is also disposed of. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] ___Page No. 3 of 3 ___ 9 September 2026