Disposed

Darshan Group and Anr. v. Madhavlal N. Pittie

Bombay HC2 Dec 2009NMS/298/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Noting plaintiffs' reliance on orders from Suit No. 224 of 1961 regarding the defendant's appointment as receiver, the court disposed of the Notice of Motion while reserving liberty to seek interim reliefs after the plaintiffs take necessary steps and demonstrate relevancy.

What did the court decide?

Notice of Motion disposed off with liberty reserved to Plaintiffs to seek interim reliefs after adopting necessary proceedings and demonstrating relevancy.

Darshan Group and Anr. Vs Madhavlal N. Pittie — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 298 OF 2009

¶4

¶5

SUIT NO. 32 OF 2009

¶6

Darshan Group & Anr. ... Plaintiffs. V/s.

¶7

Madhavlal Narayanlal Pittie. ... Defendant.

¶8

Mr. S.U. Kamdar, Sr. Counsel a/w. Kunal Cheema & Y.M. Chaudhary for the Plaintiffs.

¶9

Mr. Mustafa Doctor a/w. Mrs. D.A. Chhapgar i/b. D.J. Kamdin & Co. for the Defendant.

¶10

CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.

¶11

DATED : 2^nd DECEMBER 2009.

¶12

P.C. :-

¶13

Mr. Kamdar, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Plaintiffs states that during the course of the arguments and when the Plaintiffs were to meet the preliminary objections raised by the Defendant, they noticed that pursuant to Suit No.224 of 1961 and the orders made therein, the Defendant was appointed as a Receiver of the Suit property. However, by further order, the Defendant has not been continued as a Receiver of the Suit property but some other properties.

¶14

Mr. Kamdar submits that after taking inspection of the record in Suit No.224 of 1961, the Plaintiff desires to take such steps as are permissible in law to bring on record the factual

¶15

¶16

position. For that purpose, they have adopted appropriate proceedings.

¶17

Mr. Kamdar submits that, this would necessitate deferment of the Plaintiffs’ request for reliefs in this Suit.

¶18

In my view, if the Plaintiffs themselves are relying upon the circumstances, prevailing at the time of passing of the order dated 2^nd May 2008 in Suit No.224 of 1961, then, it is for them to adopt such proceedings as are necessary to bring on record the same. Further, they will have to demonstrate the relevancy therein, in relation to the instant proceedings.

¶19

To enable them to do so, the present Notice of Motion is disposed off with liberty reserved to the Plaintiffs to seek interim reliefs in terms of the prayers of the instant Motion after the steps as above are taken. All contentions and objections including to the maintainability of the instant Suit raised by parties are kept open. The Notice of Motion is disposed off.

¶20

(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)

Darshan Group and Anr. v. Madhavlal N. Pittie

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darshan Group and Anr. v. Madhavlal N. Pittie

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sumaira Abdulali Vs Union of India

Haresh D. Parmar Vs Pramod M. Ranpura and 4 Ors.

Vivek Ganesh Bhartu Vs Manoharlal H. Ahuja and Anr.

Ajit Singh. Vs Jasmer Singh

Mathew Stephen D'Mello. Vs Rosy K. D'Mello.

Arun Mahavir Prasad. Vs Bhimappa Ramling Sakhare.