1/3rd share of this land was agreed to be sold to Laxman and Nivrutti.
However, some part of the land which fell in Survey Nos.789/4 and 791/4 was still held by the owners jointly.
The first two defendants were really in the nature of supporting parties.
The land was taken on lease for cultivation by Govind, Sadashiv and Nivrutti the younger son of Yashwant by execution of a Kabuliyatnama, on 16.5.1944.
This appears to have been so done because defendant Nos.1 2, being the sons of Laxman, along with their mother, had already instituted proceedings against the mutation of the land in favour of Nivrutti alone, but those proceedings ended in the year 1991.
The benefit of this order, from the array of parties was to the tenants Govind, Sadashiv and Nivrutti.
Reason It appears that Yashwant passed away early some time, in the year 1936.
An Agreement to Sell was executed by Shri Phadake on 7.5.1956, i.e., prior to the cut off date, when Section 32 of the said Act came into force, in terms whereof three parcels of land were agreed to be sold to seven purchasers.
The Deputy Collector initiated proceedings under Section 32G of the said Act to determine the price of the land to be paid by the tenants, which resulted in the order dated 9.8.1961.
The family traces itself from the companymon Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ASHA SUNDRIYAL Date 2019.08.27 153603 IST ancestor, Bhimaji, who had three sons Govind, Sadashiv and Yashwant.
The alleged cause of action for the same is stated to be the numberices issued by the legal heirs of Nivrutti.
The case set up in the plaint is that the parties companystituted a Joint Hindu Family, and the properties belonged to the same.
These grandsons sued as plaintiffs, arraying the two sons of Laxman as the first two defendants while the legal heirs of Nivrutti were arrayed as the remaining defendants.
The land located at Survey Nos.789, 791 and 786 was owned by one Raghunath Hari Phadake.
The plea of the land being ancestral was companytested on the ground that the name of Laxman was never entered as a tenant of the property as he was number a signatory to the Kabuliyatnama, but, in fact, a witness to the Kabuliyatnama.
The public numberices brought to light the endeavours of the legal heirs of Nivrutti to transact the land in question.
The matter was number carried further.
Thus, the grandsons of Laxman claimed rights in the property.
In terms of the Agreement to Sell Laxman and Nivrutti along with five other parties are stated to have paid a sum of Rs.6,000/ out of the total companysideration of Rs.22,000/ .
The three owners sought partition amongst themselves of the said land, which resulted in a Mutation entry No.23330, in terms whereof Nivrutti was recognized as the individual owner of Survey Nos.789/3 and 791/3.
This Agreement to Sell was duly registered but never culminated in a sale deed.
The remaining amount had to be paid in installments.
The case sought to be set up subsequently by the legal heirs of Laxman is that rights were derived in pursuance of this document, and payments were made by Nivrutti out of the joint family funds.
The suit was companytested by the legal heirs of Nivrutti Nivrutti having passed away in the year 1999 .
There appears to have been a silence on the part of the legal heirs of Laxman till the institution of a plaint, as Special Civil Suit No.148/2003 before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nashik.
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J. The legal heirs of two deceased brothers Laxman and Nivrutti are the companytesting parties in the present proceedings, the subject matter being an open land measuring eight acres number falling within the Municipal Council of Nasik since 1987 .
