All First Appeal

Order - Status 2: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.14685 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None Present. CORAM : A.N. MARE REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 08th August, 2016 3 weeks time granted for removing office objections. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 08.08.16

Order - Status 3: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.14685 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None Present. CORAM : AJIT N. MARE, REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 29th August, 2016 3 weeks time granted for removing office objections. ­ sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 29.08.16

Order - Status 4: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.14685 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None Present. CORAM : AJIT N. MARE, REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 19th September, 2016 S.O. 3 weeks as a last chance for removing office objections. ­ sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 19.09.16

Order - Status 10: (FCA 7 of 2017) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL No. 7 OF 2017 Sarika Badal Shinde ….Appellant Vs. Shri Badal Vijay Shinde ….Respondent *********** None for the Appellant Abhijit Patil i/b. Sushant Prabhure for Respondent *********** CORAM : V.M. KANADE & P.R. BORA, JJ DATE : FEBRUARY 07, 2017 P.C. : None for the Appellant. Heard the learned counsel for the Respondent. Perused the appeal memo and the impugned order. Admit. The learned counsel for the Respondent waives service of the notice on behalf of the Respondent. The impugned order is stayed. [ P.R. BORA, J.] [ V.M. KANADE, J.] Vaishali Tikam 1/1 vat

Order - Status 14: 1/9 903-FCA-7-17.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.7 OF 2017 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.271 OF 2019 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.7 OF 2017 . . . . . . . Sarika Badal Shinde versus Badal Vijay Shinde .... Appellant .... Respondent • Mr.Sugandh B. Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicant. • Mr.Sushant Sudhakar Prabhune, Advocate for Respondent. CORAM : K. K. TATED & SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ. DATE : 09 th JANUARY, 2020. P.C. : Heard learned Counsel for the parties. By this Family Court Appeal, Appellant/Wife is challenging the judgment and decree dated 08/12/2015 passed by the Family Court, Kolhapur in Petition No.A 33 of 2015 allowing Respondent husband's Petition under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The main contention of the Appellant is that the said order was passed by the Family Court as ex-arte because no one appeared on behalf of her when the matter was called out for hearing. Both the counsel submit that for last several years, Appellant as well as Respondent are staying separately. Therefore, now it is not possible for them to reconcile the dispute and start living together. Hence, both of them have decided to take divorce by consent before the Family Court at Kolhapur. They further submit that the impugned order passed by Family Court dated 08/12/2015 be set aside. Both the Counsel submit that the matter is settled out of Court. They have tendered Consent Terms dated 09/01/2020 duly signed by the Appellant as well as Respondent along with their parents who are present before this Court. The Appellant as well as the Respondent entered into the witness box. They admitted the contents of Consent Terms as well as the execution thereof. Hence same is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification, which reads thus; "IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2017. DISTRICT – KOLHAPUR IN THE MATTER BETWEEN SARIKA BADAL SHINDE, Age – 30 years, Occu. Service, C/o. Shri. VishwasDattatrayDeshmukh 203,2nd Floor,Atmaram Complex, Near Deshmukh Petrol Pump, At & Post:Asthami, Tal. Roha, Dist. Raigad. …APPELLANT .......(ORG. RESPONDENT) VERSUS BADAL VIJAY SHINDE, Age – 31 years, Occu. Service, 217/7, A Ward, Atharv Apartment, Flat No.8 & 9, Dudhali, Tal. Karveer, Dist. Kolhapur. … RESPONDENT (ORG. PETITIONER) CONSENT TERMS Whereas the Respondent and the Appellant are husband and wife, their marriage having been solemnised at Kolhapur, on 17th of February, 2014 according to the Hindu religion, vaidic rites and ceremonies. Whereas the Respondent and the Appellant have, therefore, without carrying any ill feeling about each other in the future decided to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent on amicable terms and conditions. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED THAT the Appellant and the Respondent have decided amicably with free consent to dissolve their marriage by virtue of fling a Divorce Petition by mutual Consent. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED THAT the Respondent shall pay to the Appellant an amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh only) towards one time lump sum full and fnal settlement of their matrimonial dispute, and on the basis of the aforementioned settlement amount, the parties have agreed to dissolve their Marriage dated 17.2.2014 by Mutual Consent. Out of the settlement amount of Rs.20, 00,000/-, the Respondent shall deposit Rs 5 lakh in the Learned Family Court, Kolhapur on the date of fling of the divorce petition by mutual consent in the Learned Family Court, Kolhapur on 31/1/2020. Both the parties shall appear before the Learned Family Court, Kolhapur on 31/1/2020 and shall fle the divorce petition by mutual consent in the said Court. The remaining amount of Rs. 7,50,000/- (rupees seven lakh ffty thousand only) shall be deposited by the Respondent before the Learned Family Court, Kolhapur on or before 2/3/2020 and the last remaining amount of Rs. 7,50,000/- (rupees seven lakh ffty thousand only) shall be deposited by the Respondent before the Learned Family Court, Kolhapur on or before 10/4/2020 towards the full and fnal settlement for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent and the Appellant shall not claim any amount in future . The Appellant agrees to withdraw the said amount unconditionally from the Learned Family Court, Kolhapur after the grant of decree of divorce in the Divorce Petition by mutual consent. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED THAT the parties have not initiated any other complaint or legal proceedings against each other in any Court and shall end and settle all the disputes without flling any further complaints or legal proceedings against each other. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED THAT the parties will / shall not demand, claim anything cash, Jwellery or in kind or any other claim of whatsoever nature from each other and/or from our family members/relatives apart from the settlement amount mentioned herein above. It is agreed that Appellant will not claim any share in the moveable or immoveable property of Respondent and his parents. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED THAT whereas Respondent is not liable to give anything to the Appellant or to her family at present and in future apart from the settlement amount. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED THAT the parties after divorce will be at liberty to remarry with our any new life partner as per their sweet will and both parties have no any objection for the same against each other. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED THAT the parties after seeking the divorce shall not lodge/fle any 7 / 9 903-FCA-7-17.odt complaint in any police station and not fle any case in any court against each other to harass, fortune, blackmail and for recovery of any claim of whatsoever nature. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED THAT after the divorce, the Appellant will be known by her maiden name i.e. Sarika Deshmukh and she will not use, raise, call or address the name and surname of the Respondent in future. Similarly, the Respondent will not raise call or address the name of the Appellant as his wife in future. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED by the parties that they will abide by all terms and conditions of this Consent Terms and in case if anyone of the parties breaches any terms or conditions, then the other party will have full right to initiate legal actions against the other party. AGREED, CONFIRMED AND DECLARED by the parties that all the above terms and conditions this Consent Terms are prepared with full understanding and willingly and without any undue infuence or pressure. Dated the 9th day of January, 2020 Appellant: Sarika Badal Shinde Advocate for the Appellant Respondent: Badal Vijay Shinde Advocate for the Respondent Witnesses: 2." Both the Counsel submit that they are filing their consent Petition before the Family Court at Kolhapur for divorce by mutual consent. Both the Counsel and Family Court may be directed to entertain the same immediately without waiting for cooling period i.e. six months as the parties are residing separately for last six years. If the Petition for divorce by consent is filed before the Family Court at Kolhapur, Family Court to decide the same without waiting for cooling period i.e. six months as both the parties are residing separately for last more than six years. Undertaking given by both the parties in Consent Terms is accepted. Hence following order: (a) Family Court Appeal No.7/2017 is disposed of in terms of Consent Terms by setting aside the impugned Judgment and Decree dated 08/12/2015 passed by learned Family Court, Kolhapur in Petition No.A 33 of 2015. (b) Registry is directed to draw the decree accordingly. (c) No order as to costs. (d) In view of the disposal of Family Court Appeal in terms of Consent Terms, nothing survives in Civil Application. Hence the Civil Application stands dismissed as infructous. (e) Parties to act on authenticated copy of this order. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2431 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1529 OF 2009 Krishna Tukaram Shete Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors. Respondents Shri L.M.Acharya, advocate for applicant. Smt. G.P.Mulekar, AGP for respondents. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.A.SAYED, JJ DATED:- JULY 16, 2010 P.C. Considering issue raised in this application, we think it appropriate that reply ought to have been filed on behalf of the State of Maharashtra, respondent herein. Learned AGP seeks time to file reply within two weeks from today. Accordingly list this application on 30th July, 2010. Advance copy of the reply affidavit be made over to the Counsel for the Applicant. (A.A.SAYED, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2431 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4071 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1529 OF 2009 ...... Krishna Tukaram Shete ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.R.S.Shekhawat i/b Mr.L.M.Acharya for Applicant. Mrs.G.P.Mulekar, A.G.P. for Respondents. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED:- AUGUST 5, 2010. P.C. Request for adjournment is made at the instance of Applicant on the ground that the Advocate on record is out of station. No leave note has been filed. In such situation, the matter ought to proceed. However, by way of indulgence, we defer the hearing of this matter to 16th August 2010. It is made clear that no request for adjournment or keeping back the matter at the instance of Applicant shall be entertained on the next date of hearing. (A.A.SAYED, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2431 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1529 OF 2009 . Mr.Krishna Shete .. Applicant v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Others ..Respondents Mr.L.M.Acharya, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.A.R.Patil, AGP for the Respondents CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & R.Y.GANOO, JJ. DATED : 19th November , 2010 P.C. : The applicant had filed Special Civil Suit No.157 of 2005 claiming recovery of interest on the award amount of Rs.51,16,492/- and the said suit has been decreed for a total sum of Rs.92,78,008/- which amount has been already deposited by the State Government as directed in First Appeal No.1529 of 2009 which impugns the said decree. By this application, the plaintiff prays for leave to withdraw the amount deposited by the State Government and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we are not inclined to allow this application. Admittedly, the acquired land admeasuring about 4766.76 sq. meters located within the municipal area of Bhor, District-Pune was reserved in the development plan for the Forest Office and Nursery and its possession was taken over on 28.1.1983. The award came to be passed on or about 7.4.1998 determining the compensation payable to the plaintiff at Rs.51,16,492/- and the said amount has been paid to the plaintiff on 30.9.1998. While allowing the Special Suit by the impugned decree dated 18.4.2009, the trial court has granted simple interest at 9% on the award amount from 7.4.1998 to 30.9.1998, with which we do not find any fault atleast at this stage. However, interest has been granted at 8% per annum on Rs.51,16,492/- w.e.f. 28.1.1993 to 7.4.1998 and from 7.4.1998 to 5.1.2009 further interest has been awarded at 6% per annum. As noted earlier the amount deposited by the Government has been invested in a fixed deposit with a nationalised bank for a period of three years and even if we may not prima facie find fault in awarding interest of Rs.2,21,972/- for the period from 7.4.1998 to 13.9.1998, we are not inclined at this stage to disturb the investment. At the best First Appeal No.1529 of 2009 can be heard and decided expeditiously. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff will submit private paper book within four weeks and as soon as the appeal is ready for final hearing will take out a motion for fixing the date. Hence the stay application is rejected. [R.Y.GANOO, J.] [B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.]

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.642 OF 2012 IN DRAFT NOTICE OF MOTION NO. OF 2012 IN SUIT STAMP NO.1400 OF 2012 IN S.C.SUIT NO.1387 OF 2012 Umesh Laxmikant Raikar ....Appellant Vs. Dilip Vasant Raikar ....Respondent Mr. U. S. R. Singh for the Appellant. Mr. Lalit Jain for Respondent. CORAM : SMT. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA,J. DATE : 26th JULY 2012 P.C. : Mr. Lalit Jain, the learned Counsel for the Respondent points out that the submissions on the Notice of Motion have been substantially completed. The Respondent has completed his submissions and the submissions of the Appellant are partly complete. The Notice of Motion is kept for further hearing on 31st July 2012. In this circumstance, S.O. to 24th August 2012. (SMT. R. P. SONDURBALDOTA,J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 642 OF 2012 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 830 OF 2012 Umesh Laxmikant Raikar ...Appellant/Applicant V/s. Dilip Vasant Raikar ...Respondent Mr. U.S.R. Singh for the Appellant/Applicant Mr. Lalit V. Jain for the Respondent CORAM: RANJIT MORE, J. DATE: AUGUST 28, 2012 P.C.:- Mr. Sigh, learned counsel for the appellant, seeks leave to withdraw this Appeal from Order, as the respondent's Notice of Motion has been dismissed on 17th August, 2012. Leave is granted. Appeal from Order is disposed of as withdrawn. Civil Application does not survive, and stands disposed of accordingly. ( RANJIT MORE, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 173 OF 2005 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3562 OF 2004 IN L. C. SUIT NO. 3925 OF 2004 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 495 OF 2005. Parsi Panchayat Funds and Properties and another. ..Appellants. vs. Kishore Patel and others. ..Respondents. Mr. Rajiv Narula, i/b. M/s. Jhangiani, Narula & Assoc., for Appellants. .... .... Mr. S.K. Sonawane, for RespondentBMC. CORAM : SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. DATE : 19TH JUNE, 2012. P.C. Mr. Narula states that the appeal has become infructuous in view of final disposal of the suit. The appeal from order is accordingly disposed off. In view of the disposal of the Appeal, Civil Application no. 495 of 2005 does not survive. The same is accordingly disposed off. ( SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3260 OF 2015 A/W CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3261 OF 2015 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.14661 OF 2015 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. ... Applicant/Appellant Vs. Smt.Shobha Babasaheb Babar & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.S.M. Dange for the Applicant/Appellant Mr.V.R. Gaikwad for Respondent Nos.1 to 6 CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: 30th SEPTEMBER, 2015 P.C.: Civil Application No.3260 of 2015 is filed for condonation of delay of 15 days in preferring the appeal. The learned Counsel for the respondent is present. He concedes to the condonation of delay. Hence, this application is allowed. Appeal be numbered. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3261 OF 2015: - By this Civil Application, the applicant / insurance Company seeks stay to the operation and execution of the impugned judgement and award dated 25.11.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Satara in MACP No.535 of 2012. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the insurance company is ready to deposit the entire decretal amount alongwith interest accrued thereon, within a period of six weeks. In view of the above, interim stay granted to the operation and execution of the impugned judgement and award dated 25.11.2014 subject to the applicant depositing in the MACT, Satara the entire decretal amount alongwith interest accrued thereon, within a period of six weeks from today. The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited in this Court at the time of filing of appeal shall be transferred to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Satara. Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) CERTIFICATE Certified that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order.