Allowed
Mrs. Savita Satish Jaykar v. Mrs. Jayashree Madhav Jayakar
Bombay HCCST/74/2009
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION
CHAMBER SUMMOMS NO. 74 OF 2009
IN
SUIT NO. 5 OF 2002
IN
PETITION NO. 949 OF 2001
Mrs.Savita Satish Jayakar
...Petitioner
vs.
Mr.Vijay Manohar Vyavahyarkar
Vrindava Co-op.Hsg.Soc.Ltd. & Anr....Defendants/
Respondents
and
Mr.Satish K. Jayakar & Ors....Applicants
Mr.Nitin G. Raut and G.P. Vas for the Applicants.
Mr.N.V. Bhutekar for the Defendants.
CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J.
DATED : SEPTEMBER 29, 2009
P.C. :-
1Heard Counsel for the Applicants.
2The Chamber Summons is allowed. There is
no delay in bringing the heirs of petitioner on
record. Consequential amendments in the petition
2
are, accordingly, allowed in terms of Schedule
annexed to the Chamber Summons. Chamber Summons is
made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and
(b). Amendment to be carried out within four weeks.
Chamber Summons is disposed of. The petition,
therefore, will have to be converted into a petition
for Letters of Administration with the Will annexed.
Mrs. Savita Satish Jayakar
Mr. Vijay Manohar Vyavahyarkar
Mr. Satish K. Jayakar
Vrindava Co-op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd.
V.M. Kanade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court