k 1/2 24 cra 371.23 as.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.371 OF 2023 Manisha Manohar Bare & Ors. ....Applicants V/S Surekha Amol Kamble & Ors. ....Respondents _________ Ms. Anita Borkar for the Applicants. Mr. Prathamesh Bhargude with Ms. Babita Kesharwani for Respondents. __________ CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 12 FEBRUARY 2026. P.C.: 1. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for parties. 2. It appears that Defendant No.1 has raised a speci9c defence that there was only one room in the old building in respect of which there are two claims. The Plaintiffs have 9led L.C. Suit No.301 of 2014 whereas sister-in-law of Plaintiff No.1 has 9led L.C. Suit No.4335 of 2013. In both the Suits, Permanent Alternate Accommodations (PAA) are sought. It is the case of Defendant No.1 that only one PAA can be granted. In this view of the matter, it cannot be held that there is any admission on the part of Defendant No.1 for passing of a decree under provisions of Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the Code). 3. The Suit of the sister-in-law (L.C. Suit No.4335 of 2013) is already decreed. It is in the interest of the Plaintiffs that they prosecute L.C. Suit No.301 of 2014 and get the same decided in an expeditious manner. katkam Page No. 1 of 2 k 2/2 24 cra 371.23 as.doc 4. The Civil Revision Application is accordingly disposed of without granting any relief in favour of the Applicants. The Trial Court shall however accord due priority to the Suit considering the position that the same is pending since the year 2014 and that companion L.C. Suit No.4335 of 2013 has already been decided. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) katkam Page No. 2 of 2 SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM Digitally signed by SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM Date: 2026.02.13 15:29:47 +0530