Disposed

Boman Rustom Irani. v. Tehmton Rustom Irani And Anr.

Bombay HC23 Mar 2015TS/58/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses the non-implementation of consent terms in a testamentary suit settlement. The court directed the plaintiff's counsel to ascertain the time required for the payment of the balance amount and fixed the matter for future monitoring.

What did the court decide?

The matter was adjourned for the plaintiff to inform the court of the time required for payment and for implementation to be monitored.

Boman Rustom Irani. Vs Tehmton Rustom Irani And Anr. — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

42-TS58-05.DOC

¶2

Atul

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO. 58 OF 2005

¶4

IN

¶5

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 87 OF 2003

¶6

Boman Rustom Irani…Plaintiff
Versus
Tehmton Rustom Irani & Anr.…Defendants

¶7

Ms. Teja Thanekar, i/b M/s. Divekar & Co., for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Mihir Purohit, i/b Yatin R. Shah, for the Defendants.

¶8

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 23rd March 2015

¶9

PC:-

¶10

1.This suit was settled on 21st June 2012. Consent terms were
tendered and an order was passed in accordance with those consent
terms.

¶11

2.The consent terms inter alia required the Plaintiff to pay the
remaining amount agreed, i.e., an amount of Rs. 6 crores to the
Defendants. This was to be paid to Defendants Nos. 1(a), 1(b) and
1(c) on vtheir acating and removing themselves from the property at

¶12

1 of 2

¶13

42-TS58-05.DOC

¶14

Dahisar Village. In addition, another Suit No. 2110 of 2006 (which
is also listed today at Sr. No. 45) was thereupon to be withdrawn.

¶15

3.It seems that there has been something of a stand-off, with
both sides waiting for the other to move first. The result is that the
amount has not been paid, possession has not been handed over and
the consent terms have remained without implementation. This is
unacceptable especially since the consent terms contained
undertakings to this Court.

¶16

4.Learned Advocate for the Plaintiff will inform the Court as to
how much time is required for the Plaintiff to be prepared to make
payment of the balance of the amount of Rs. 2 crores required to be
paid to each of Defendants Nos. 1(a), 1(b) and 1(c). The
implementation of these consent terms will then be monitored by
this Court. It is clarified that the learned Advocate for the Plaintiff
will also take instructions as to the amount that remains to be paid
to these three Defendants.

¶17

5. List the matter on Friday, 27th March 2015 at 11.00 a.m.

¶18

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶19

2 of 2

Boman Rustom Irani. v. Tehmton Rustom Irani And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Boman Rustom Irani. v. Tehmton Rustom Irani And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prerna Wadhawan Vs Sheeri Mohan and Anr.

Bhavanji Shamji Lalan and 11 Ors. Vs Lalji Nanshi Lalan (Deceased)

Vinayak Sagun Pednekar Vs Manisha Manohar Gawandi

Smt. Radhabai Kishore Kadam Vs Smt. Rakmabai Baburao Nanavare......Deceased.

Naresh Shamrao Hedau Vs Shamrao Govind Hedau (Deceased)

Mr.Ashdin Mackey Pithawala (Plaintiff NO.1) Vs Mrs. Kainaaz Ashdin Pithawala (Plaintiff NO.2)