Partly allowed
Reena Sudhir Nevrekar and Anr. v. Vidya Ramchandra Amonkar and Ors.
Bombay HCTS/89/2013
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.
908-TS89-13.DOC
Atul
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO. 89 OF 2013
IN
TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 256 OF 2012
Reena Sudhir Nevrekar & Anr.…Plaintiffs
Versus
Vidya Ramchandra Amonkar & 2 Ors.…Defendants
Mr. Burhan Bukhari, for the Plaintiffs.
Mr. U.M. Mahajan, with Ms. Teja Thanekar, i/b M/s. Divekar &
Co., for the Defendants.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 27th March 2015
PC:-
1.On the application of the learned Advocate for the three
caveators, Vidya Ramchandra Amonkar, Shubhada alias Viraj
Dattatraya Subhedar and Smita Sandeep Pikle, the three caveats are
dismissed as withdrawn.
2.The Testamentary Petition to proceed as an uncontested
petition for the grant of probate.
1 of 2
908-TS89-13.DOC
3. Drawn up decree dispensed with.
4. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
2 of 2
Reena Sudhir Nevrekar
Vidya Ramchandra Amonkar
G.S. PATEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court