Date: 19-04-2018
Business: Advocate Ms. Siddhique for the Plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. Sarala Yadav for defendant no. 2 and 4 to 9 and filed original N/M no. 1284/18 alongwith affidavit in support. t.o.r.
As court is busy in dictating orders and preceipe and urgent matters. Hence, matter adjd to 3.05.2018 for N/M hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 03-05-2018
Date: 03-05-2018
Business: Advocate Ms. Siddhiqui for the plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. Kamble for BMC/deft present.
Advocate Mr. Singh h/f Pawar for Defendant no. 11 present.
Original N/M no. 1269/18 alongwith affidavit in support tendered by Defendant no. 11. t.o.r.
Advocate for the Plaintiff seeks adjournment for filing reply to N/M of Defendant nos. 2 and 4 to 9 and reply to N/M of Defendant no. 11. Granted as a last chance.
Matter adjd to 19.06.2018 for reply two to N/M by the Plaintiff/ for cross-examination of PW-1.
LO at 5.15p.m.
Advocate Ms. Sadhana Yadav for Defendant nos. 2 and 4 to 9 present.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 19-06-2018
Date: 19-06-2018
Business: Plaintiff and adv absent.
Adv Siddiqui hf adv Sasidharan for plaintiff present and filed reply of NM no.1284/18 and 1269/18 t.o.r.
Adv Singh h/f adv Pawar for def no.11 present.
Adv Khandagale for def/BMC present.
Adjourned to 03.07.2018 for NM reply.
LO at 3.30 pm
Adv Anita Vasani for def no.2 present.
Already adjourned to 03.07.2018.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 03-07-2018
Date: 03-07-2018
Business: Do to heavy rain Advocate and Staff is absent Hence Board is
Discharge and Suit is Adjourned to 19.07.2018 for N.M. Reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 19-07-2018
Date: 19-07-2018
Business: Plff and adv absent.
Adv. Kavita Singh for deft.nos.2 and 4 present.
Adjourned to 14.08.2018 for N/m No. 1284/18 and 1269/18 for hrg.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 14-08-2018
Date: 14-08-2018
Business: Court is vacant. Hence today board is discharged
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 04-09-2018
Date: 04-09-2018
Business: Court is vacant. Hence today board is discharged.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 27-09-2018
Date: 27-09-2018
Business: Court is busy in hearing and dictating order in respect of urgent application as well as daily board urgent matters, hence board is discharged and case is adjourned to 25/10/2018.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 25-10-2018
Date: 25-10-2018
Business: Court is on leave. Hence today board is discharged
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 13-11-2018
Date: 13-11-2018
Business: Adv. Tilam Siddique for Plaintiff present.
Adv. Harprit Singh for Defendant no. 11 present and filed rejoinder of Notice of Motion no. 1269/18.
Adv. Anita Vasani for Deft.no. 2 present.
Adv. Kamble for BMC/Deft.no. 10 present.
KB
LO
Adv. E.K.Shashidharan for Plaintiff present.
Heard argument of Plaintiff\''s advocate on N/m no. 1269/18 and 1284/18. Plaintiff\''s advocate submits that both the N/ms are moved after Plaintiff has filed affidavit of evidence and after document are exhibited. Further both N/ms are filed after seeking so many dates for cross examination of PW 1. It is argued that besides declaration by way of adverse possession other relief are also claimed by Plaintiff hence suit can not be dismissed without giving chance to the party to adduce their evidence. Hence Plaintiff\''s advocate argue that both N/ms are liable to be dismissed.
Adv. for Defendant no. 2 submitted that today the copy of reply of N/m no. 1284/18 is served by Plaintiff on Defts. Hence she will argue Notice of Motion on next date by filing rejoinder to the reply.
Adv. for Defendant. no. 11 also sought time for argument on the ground that Senior Adv. Mr. Datta Pawar is not keeping good health hence adjd. to 30-11-2018 for Defendants argument on both N/ms.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 30-11-2018
Date: 30-11-2018
Business: Advocate Ms. Siddhiqui for Plaintiff present.
Advocate Mr. Pandey for Defendant no.2 present and filed rejoinder to Notice of Motion no.1284/18 t.o.r.
Advocate Mr. Datta Pawar for Defendant no.11 present
Advocate for BMC/Deft present.
Heard advocate for Defendant no.2 who has strongly argued that in view of observations of Hon\\\''ble Supreme Court in the case between State of Hariyana Vs Mukesh Kumar and Others (2011) 10 SCC 404 the plaint for declaration of ownership on the basis of adverse possession is not maintainable. He has also referred unreported order passed by Hon\\\''ble High Court in suit no.1973/10 and argued that in said suit, Hon\\\''ble High Court brought it to the notice of Plaintiff that suit for declaration on the basis of adverse possession is not maintainable thereafter said suit came to be withdrawn. Learned advocate for Defendant no.2 pointed out disputed agreement dated 14/07/1961 and MA order filed on record. On the basis of those documents it is argued that Mahatam Singh was not the owner of suit property but Defendant no.11 was the owner of suit property. Further, it is argued that disputed agreement is not registered, it is executed on stamp of Rs.1.50 paise hence advocate for Defendant no.2 strongly argued that suit is necessary to be dismissed and NM is necessary to be made absolute.
In respect of NM No.1269/18 Learned advocate for Defendant no.11 argued that arguments of Defendant no.2 are adopted and further it is pointed out that on the basis of conveyance deed 12/12/05 Defendant no.11 has become owner of suit property as his vendor Defendant no.1 has conveyed it to him and it is pointed out that Mahatam Singh was not owner of suit property but Defendant no.1 was its owner therefore on the basis of disputed agreement filed by Plaintiff, no relief can be granted in favour of Plaintiff. Learned advocate for Defendant no.11 argued that Plaintiff has pleaded in plaint that Khemchand Gorumal the original owner of suit property constituted a private trust namely Vishwamber Trust and transfer said property to said trust hence Plaintiff\\\''s claim is not maintainable. It is argued that prayer A f the plaint is only substantial prayer and if that prayer will not remain nothing remains in the suit. Hence NM is necessary to be made absolute.
Case is adjourned to 06/12/2018 for Order on Notice of Motion.
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 06-12-2018
Date: 06-12-2018
Business: Advocate Ms. Siddiqui for Plaintiff present.
Advocate Mr. Harpreet Singh for Defendant no.11 present
Advocate for BMC/Deft present.
F.R.S.R. following order has passed -
ORDER
N/m No.1269/2018 stands dismissed/disposed off.
Case is adjourned to 13/12/2018 for hearing of Notice of Motion.
Nature Of Disposal: DISMISSED
Disposal Date: 06-12-2018