Girish S/o Dharmavir Madan (through GPA) v. Nandkumar S/o Shankarrao Rasne and Ors.
Background
The appellant's sole grievance was that eviction proceedings initiated by the first respondent should not go ahead until his 3/7th share of the property, as recognised in a preliminary partition decree dated 6 December 2004, was actually identified and demarcated on the ground.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court directly addressed and granted the specific relief sought: it disposed of the appeals by directing the trial court to appoint a Court Commissioner in the final decree proceedings to identify the respective shares, to be completed within two months of either party producing a copy of the judgment before the trial court. Until that identification was completed, the eviction proceedings against the appellant were to be kept in abeyance. The Court also clarified, as a caution, that a separate pending SLP against the Second Appeal No. 611 of 2010 judgment would have no bearing on the eviction proceedings.
Lesson Learnt
Where an appellant's real concern is procedural sequencing (e.g., that their property share be clearly identified before eviction is enforced against them), courts can finally dispose of the appeal by fixing a concrete, time-bound process and interim protection, even while leaving the underlying share-identification exercise to be completed by the trial court.