SHRI LADU GANESH VETALKAR Vs. SHRI VISHWANATH BHIKAJI VETALKAR, MAJOR, EMPLOYED IN POLICE DEPARTMENT (DECEASED)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this Appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 22/03/2007, passed by the learned Trial Court in Civil Suit No.283/2004 (old RCS No.117/1981). That was a suit filed by the respondent nos.1 to 4 for correction of the Survey records and for perpetual injunction. The suit was initially filed against the sole defendant (since deceased), now represented by some of the private respondents, who are the legal heirs. Subsequently, the Government and defendant nos.3 to 32 were arrayed as party defendants to the suit. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to in their original capacity.

(2.) It is the case of the plaintiffs that the father/ father-in-law of the plaintiffs i.e. late Bhikaji Ladu Vetalkar was granted a plot of land by the Government as an 'Alwara No.416' on 25/09/1929 and since then, Bhikaji Vetalkar was in occupation and possession of the said plot, which is now surveyed under No.65/0 of village Tuem. It was submitted that the original defendant had no right in the suit property and his name is wrongly recorded in the survey records. Some time in the month of December, 1980, the plaintiff no.1 and his brother Jairam came to know that the name of the defendant no.1 is appearing in the survey records and on the basis of the said entry, the defendant no.1 had forcibly entered into the suit property. The matter was reported to the police and subsequently, the suit came to be filed for following reliefs :

(3.) The original defendant no.1 filed his Written Statement and claimed that he is the son of late Bhikaji Vetalkar, who was given in adoption to late Ganesh Vetalkar, who is the brother of late Bhikaji. It was contended that late Bhikaji and late Ganesh were staying together as a joint family, of which Bhikaji was the Manager. It was contended that the suit property was asset of the joint family and the suit property was jointly developed by late Bhikaji as well as the defendant no.1 and his sons. The learned Trial Court framed issues (which were subsequently re-framed) as under :