Quick Summary: A legal fight between Mohini Resorts and Shankar Gore over property rights in Pune has been settled. The Bombay High Court sided with Mohini Resorts, dismissing claims by Asha Patankar, who tried to get rights to the property.
The case is about a property in Shivaji Nagar, Pune, originally owned by Trimbak Hari Awate. Over the years, the property was used as security for loans, rented, and sub-rented to different people, creating a complicated situation of who owned and rented the property.
In 1980, Mohini Resorts filed to carry out court orders from 1968 against the renters, including Shankar Godaji Gore. Asha Patankar, claiming she inherited rights, filed to get involved, which was first allowed by a local court in Pune in 2017.
Initial Court Ruling: On June 7, 2017, the local court allowed Asha Patankar to get involved, saying she might have rights to the property as a family member.
High Court's Decision: On January 5, 2026, Justice Milind N. Jadhav of the Bombay High Court canceled the previous order, ruling that Asha Patankar had no right to be involved in the case.
"The right in the subject property... belongs to the branch of Vasudeo Vaidya," stated Justice Milind N. Jadhav.
Family Agreement: The court recognized a family agreement from 1982, where properties were divided among the heirs of Dinkar Balkrishna Vaidya, leaving out Asha Patankar from the disputed property.
Property Rights: The court confirmed that Mohini Resorts had the right to carry out the court order and take control of the property.
Dismissal of Claims: Asha Patankar's claim was dismissed because she had already received her share of the family property.
The court ruled in favor of Mohini Resorts, allowing them to proceed with the court orders without interference from Asha Patankar. The previous order was canceled.
The court's decision means Mohini Resorts can now continue with their plans for the property, ending a long legal fight.
"The parties have enjoyed the properties and share in the estate coming to their share for a long period of time," noted Justice Jadhav, emphasizing the finality of the court's decision.
No costs were awarded, and the request to pause the judgment was declined, closing the chapter on this legal saga.
