Aruna Raval vs Prithvi Raval

C.A. No. 517 of 2012 @ SLP(C) No. 27489 of 2010

Leave granted.

The appeal is on the very limited issue of the ratio in which Schedule-I property has been divided between the Appellant (Prithvi Raval) and the Respondent (Aruna Raval) following a decree of divorce between the two. On a petition u/s 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, at the instance of the Respondent, the High Court has held the Respondent entitled to 2/3rd share and the Appellant to l/3rd share in the property in question. In course of submissions before this Court the parties agreed to divide the property in the ratio of 60% and 40%; with the larger share of 60% going to the Respondent and the smaller share of 40% to the Appellant.

Here, it may be noted that the hearing of the case was adjourned to enable Mr. Basava Prabhu S. Patil, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant, to obtain clear instructions from his client.

Mr. Patil reported to the Court that though he has no written instructions, he was able to speak to the Appellant, Dr. Prithvi Raval, on telephone and he has agreed to this arrangement.

Mr. S.S. Ramdas, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Respondent, similarly Stated before the Court that he has taken instructions from the Respondent who is personally present in Court.

With the consent of the parties, therefore, we modify the High Court order and direct that the Scheduled-I property, namely, House No. 313 (Old No. 12/19), 4th Cross, I Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore, comprising ground and first floors, having a built up area of 2300 sq.ft. [East to West 45 feet and North to South 90 feet (in all 4.050 sq.ft.)] will be divided between the Respondent and the Appellant in the ratio of 60% and 40% respectively. The division of the property in the aforesaid ratio may be made, as far as practicable, by drawing a vertical line across it.

The execution petition pending before the Family Court is directed to be expedited. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

SLP(C) No. 29998 of 2010

In view of the order passed in the connected appeal @ SLP (C) No. 27489 of 2010, the SLP (C) No. 29998 of 2010 becomes in fructuous and is dismissed as such.