Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

63. Mr. Shah the learned counsel for the defendants would urge that all the aforesaid difficulties are rooted in facts. At this stage, the claim of the Plaintiffs cannot be taken at its face value. It was urged that the report of Nadkarni & Co., Architects, will have to be tested at the trial. Mr. Shah further urged that the report of M/s. Shreeya Services Private Limited, Architects, appointed by the defendants, on the other hand, indicates that equitable partition of the Larger Andheri Property is possible. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said with certainty that it appears that partition of the Larger Andheri Property is not reasonably possible.

65. In contrast, in its report, M/s. Shreeya Services Private ia-2685-2023.doc Limited, Architects, professed to propose an equitable distribution of the Larger Andheri Property. The special circumstances associated with the property on account of large scale encroachment by the slum dwellers, existence of large cattle sheds (tabelas), the effect brought about by the passing of nallas, the division of the Larger Andheri Property as well as disputed property into plots on account of passing of nallas, reservation of lands for DP roads and other designations and overall situation of the lands so as to afford equitable partition of the property from the perspective of economic viability and development potential, does not seem to have been adequately weighed in by M/s. Shreeya Services Private Limited, Architects.