Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6378 (BOM)

LALASAHEB BAPURAO DESHMUKH DIED THROUGH LRS ABASAHEB LALASAHEB DESHMUKH AND OTHERS v. UNMESH SURENDRA GANDHI AND OTHERS

WP/2426/2024 · 2025-07-25

Shri Rohit W Joshi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

942-wp-2426-2024.odt -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 942 WRIT PETITION NO. 2426 OF 2024 1. Lalasaheb Bapurao Deshmukh (Died) Through LR’s 1-A. Shri. Abasaheb s/o Lalasaheb Deshmukh, Age : 49 years, Occu. Agri. 1-B. Shri. Sunil s/o Lalasaheb Deshmukh, Age : 45 years, Occu. Agri. 1-C. Shri. Suhas s/o. Lalasaheb Deshmukh, Age : 40 years, Occu. Agri. 2. Jaysing s/o Bapurao Deshmukh (Died) Through LR’s 2-A Putabali w/o Jaysing Deshmukh, Age : 60 years, Occu. Agri. 2-B Prashant s/o Jaysing Deshmukh, Age : 47 years, Occu. Agri. 2-C Sushant s/o Jaysing Deshmukh, Age : 44 years, Occu. Agri., 2-D Sachin s/o Jaysing Deshmukh, Age : 27 years, Occu. Agri., All are R/o Deolali, Tq. and Dist. Osmanabad ...Petitioners VERSUS 1. Unmesh s/o Surendra Gandhi Age : 52 years, Occu. : Agri., 2. Vidhyavardhan Surendra Gandhi, Age : 51 years, Occu. : Agri., 3. Surendra Vinaykumar Gandhi, Narwade 2025:BHC-AUG:20195 942-wp-2426-2024.odt -2- Age : 70 years, Occu. : Agri., All are R/o Marwadi Galli, Osmanabad, Tq. And Dist. Osmanabad. 4. Bapurao Abashaheb Deshmukh (died) Through LR’s 4-A. Bubasaheb s/o Bapurao Deshmukh (Died) Through LR’s 4-A-1. Nagesh s/o Bubasaheb Deshmukh, Age : 40 years, Occu. : Agri., 5. Daulatrao s/o Bubasaheb Patil, Age: 60 years, Occu.: Agri., 6. Babruwan s/o Bubasaheb Patil Age: 60 years, Occu.: Agri. 7. Sidram s/o Namdeo Bhalekar, Age: 45 years, Occu.: Agri.. 8. Ravindra s/o Vishwambhar Deshmukh (Died) Through LR's. 8-A. Parvati wd/o Ravindra Deshmukh, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., 8-B. Dayanand s/o Ravindra Deshmukh, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri,, 8-C. Devanand s/o Ravindra Deshmukh, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., All are R/o Deolali, Tq. And Dist. Osmanabad. 8-D. Jayashree w/o Chandrakant More, Age: Major, Occu. Household, R/o Vadgaon (Siddheshwar), Tq. And Dist. Osmanabad. Narwade 942-wp-2426-2024.odt -3- 8-E. Laxmi @ Mai w/o Popat Jamdade, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., R/o Kamtha, Tq. Tuljapur, Dist. Osmanabad. 9. Ashok s/o Vishwambhar Deshmukh, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., 10. Kalyan s/o Vishwambhar Deshmukh, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., 11. Sanjay s/o Uttam Deshmukh, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., All are R/o Deolali, Tq. And Dist. Osmanabad. 12. Trishala w/o Papit More, Age: Major, Occu.: Household, R/o Vadgaon (Siddheshwar), Tq. And Dist. Osmanabad. 13. Sangeeta w/o Vidyanand Deshmukh, Age: Major, Occu.: Household, R/o Deolali, Tq. & Dist. Osmanabad. 14. Pankaj s/o Vidyanand Deshmukh, Age: Major, Occu: Household, R/o Deolali, Tq. & Dist. Osmanabad ...Respondents ... Mr. Jaydeep S. Kadam h/f. Mr. Salunke Mayur Vasant, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.Deshmukh Vivekanand B. For R/8 (A to E) 9 To 14, Mr. Umesh Mitkari h/f. Mr. Mukul Kulkarni, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 ... CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. DATED : 25th JULY 2025 ORAL JUDGEMENT:- 1. Defendant Nos.1, 4 and 5 in Regular Civil Suit No.543 of 1986 have filed the present petition in order to challenge order dated Narwade 942-wp-2426-2024.odt -4- 17.07.2023 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad allowing application at ‘Exhibit-276’ which is an application for amendment of plaint filed by respondent nos.1 to 3 (original plaintiffs). 2. Perusal of order dated 17.07.2023 passed by the learned Trial Court will demonstrate that the suit for partition was filed seeking half share in the suit properties which are agricultural lands. It appears from the order passed by the learned Trial Court that after filing of the suit certain tenancy proceedings were adjudicated and the controversy was finally put at rest by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Considering these subsequent developments, the learned Trial Court has deemed it appropriate to allow the application for amendment. 3. The learned Advocate for the petitioners contend that permitting the plaintiffs to amend the plaint thereby increasing their share from ½ to 3/4th will amount to allowing them to withdraw an implied admission that they had only one half share in the suit property. The other contention raised is that the suit is of the year 1986 and the application for amendment is filed in the year 2023 and the same should have been rejected by the learned Trial Court. 4. As regards the first contention, the plaintiff has amended the Narwade 942-wp-2426-2024.odt -5- plaint in view of certain subsequent development namely adjudication of tenancy proceedings by judicial orders. The contention regarding admission being withdrawn is therefore liable to be rejected. As regards the second contention it appears that the suit properties are agricultural lands and apart from the suit for partition tenancy proceedings are also on going. Although, the date of order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is not mentioned in the order, the learned Counsel for the respondent/original plaintiff states that the matter was decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 14.09.2016. Since this is a subsequent development, the learned Trial Court has allowed the application for amendment. This Court sees no reason to take a different view of the matter. 5. Needless to mention that merely by permitting the plaintiff to amend the plaint, the Trial Court has not accepted his contention as regards entitlement to 3/4th share in the suit property. The claim will have to be proved by the plaintiffs in accordance with law. 6. However, it is apparent that the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 14.09.2016, this according to the plaintiffs had put the controversy to the rest finally. The application for amendment is filed six and half years thereafter on 30.01.2023. Narwade 942-wp-2426-2024.odt -6- 7. Having regard to the delay in filing the application it will be appropriate that some cost will be awarded in order to balance the equities. Hence, the following order:- O R D E R i. The petition is dismissed. ii. The order dated 17.07.2023 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Osmanabad allowing the amendment application at ‘Exhibit-276’ in Regular Civil Suit No.543 of 1986 is upheld, subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/-, Rs.5,000/- to defendant nos.1 to 5 and Rs.5,000/- to Defendant Nos.8 and 9. [ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.] Narwade