Partly allowed

Indira Harinder Rai D/O Giryanna Shetty v. Sundari Wd/O Giryanna Shetty and 10 Ors.

Bombay HC15 Sept 2009NMS/1979/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a partition suit, the Court made the notice of motion absolute to continue the ad-interim order until final disposal, reserving the right to implead third parties if they establish third party rights.

What did the court decide?

Notice of motion made absolute to continue ad-interim order; liberty reserved to implead third parties deemed by defendants detrimentally.

Indira Harinder Rai D/O Giryanna Shetty Vs Sundari Wd/O Giryanna… — Partition | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

: 1 :

¶2

USJ

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1979 OF 2009 IN

¶4

SUIT NO.1099 OF 2009

¶5

Indira Harinder Rai
D/o. Giryanna Shetty .. Plaintiff

¶6

V/s.

¶7

Sundari Wd/o. Giriyanna Shetty
and Ors... Defendants

¶8

Mr. Anit R. Mishra for the plaintiff

¶9

Mr. Vishal Phal i/by Sunita Sonawane for defendant Nos.1
and 2.

¶10

CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 15th SEPTEMBER, 2009.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

1.In a dispute which is between the plaintiff who is the
daughter and the 1st defendant mother and other members of

¶13

the family, the prayer of the plaintiff is that the parties
to this suit are joint owners of the suit property
(Exh."A"). She seeks partition and separate possession of
her alleged 1/7th share.

¶14

2.The 1st defendant has filed an affidavit which was

¶15

duly considered by this Court during the course of granting

¶16

ad-interim reliefs. The statement made therein is that the

¶17

suit property exclusively belongs to the 1st defendant and
2nd defendant confirms this fact. However, statement is

¶18

made in para 6 of the reply that the structures on the

¶19

property being occupied for a long time by the occupants so

¶20

: 2 :

¶21

also being dilapidated and old, the property is declared as
a slum. The 1st defendant states that in the interest of

¶22

the slum occupants and slum dwellers, the development of
the property is entrusted to one Starwing Developers Pvt.
Ltd. and there are agreements in that behalf. Mr. Phal
appearing on behalf of the defendant Nos.1 and 2 sought to
rely upon certain documents. However, these documents are

¶23

not a part of the annexures to the reply. If, indeed any
third party rights are created or the right to deal with
the property is otherwise assigned by the 1st defendant,
then, nothing prevents either the defendants or the
assignee / developer from approaching this Court and
requesting that they be impleaded as party defendants and
the ad-interim order be vacated. As and when such
application is made, it will be dealt with on its own
merits and in accordance with law. For the present, there
is no serious dispute that this motion can be made absolute
in terms of the ad-interim order passed on 5th August,
2009. Accordingly, the motion is made absolute in terms
the ad-interim order with liberty as above. No order as
to costs. Ad-interim order to continue till hearing and
final disposal of the suit but without prejudice to the
rights and contentions of both sides.

¶24

(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

Indira Harinder Rai D/O Giryanna Shetty v. Sundari Wd/O Giryanna Shetty and 10 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indira Harinder Rai D/O Giryanna Shetty v. Sundari Wd/O Giryanna Shetty and 10 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Municipal Corporation for the City of Kalyan and Dombivli Vs Leo Advertising and Marketing Co.

M/S. Vinayak Land Development Corpn. Vs Shree Resham Textiles Mills Ltd. and Ors.

Satish T. Mehta Vs Arr Industrial Network

Deepak N. Bathija Vs K Mani Naidu and Anr.

The Federal Bank Ltd. Vs Rohikant K. Kasbe and Anr.

Chandrakant R. Patel and Anr. Vs Rambhai R. Patel