The High Court at Bombay dismissed a Chamber Summons for inspection of specific documents. Plaintiffs clarified the original Memorandum of Family Settlement was with Defendants or destroyed, satisfying the procedural requirement.
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.
chs 1053-2011.doc
1/2
sat
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1053 OF 2011 IN SUIT NO. 2189 OF 2007
Babulal K. Jain & Ors. …Plaintiffs vs. Uttamchand K. Jain & Ors. ...Defendants
Mr.Chirag Mody with Ms.Amita Jasani and Ms.Dharmika Patel i/b. M/s.Purnanand & Co. for Plaintiffs.
Mr.Harinder Toor i/b. M/s.Crawford Bayley & Co. for Defendant Nos.1 to 3. Mr.Rajiv Singh i/b. M/s.Chitnis & Co. for Defendant Nos.4 to 12.
CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J.
23 JULY 2014
P.C. :
The Chamber Summons is taken out by Defendant Nos.1 to 3 for inspection of documents referred to and relied upon by the Plaintiffs in the plaint and proceedings of the Notice of Motion. Since taking out the present Chamber Summons, inspection has been offered to the Advocates of Defendant nos.1 to 3. In view of the inspection offered, learned Counsel for Defendant No.1 to 3 preses only for inspection of documents listed at Serial Nos.4, 57, 58, 59, 60 and 63 of Exhibit-F and Serial Nos.3 and 10 of Exhibit-G to the affidavit in support of the Chamber Summons.
2 Serial No.4 consists of a Memorandum of Family Settlement for the performance of which the present suit is filed. It is the grievance of the Defendants that the original of this Memorandum of Family Settlement is not given inspection of by the Plaintiffs though a true copy of the same is produced with the plaint. The Plaintiffs have given a detailed explanation as regards this document in their reply to the Chamber Summons. The Plaintiffs have also annexed a table containing particulars of documents of which inspection was
chs 1053-2011.doc
2/2
sat
given and of which inspection could not be given along with the reasons for the same. As for the Memorandum of Family Settlement, it is submitted by the Plaintiffs in this table that the original of this document is either with Defendant No.1 or the original has been destroyed by Defendant Nos.1 to 3, as pointed out in the affidavit in reply to the Chamber Summons. Having regard to these statements on oath, there is no question of ordering inspection of this document against the Plaintiffs. As for the other documents, referred to above, it appears that the inspection of the originals has already been granted by the Plaintiffs to the Advocates of the Defendants.
3 Having regard to the above, no orders need to be passed on the Chamber Summons and the same is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Babulal K. Jain & Ors.
Uttamchand K. Jain & Ors.
S.C. Gupte
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
