Single judge order made a chamber summons in Testamentary Petition absolute in favor of Caveatrix/Applicant explaining delay in realizing petition copy.
The Chamber Summons was made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).
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.
918-CST36-16.DOC
Atul
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 36 OF 2016
IN
CAVEAT NO. 21 OF 2016
IN
TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 604 OF 2015
Shri Uday Rajaram Manjrekar…Petitioner
Versus
Annapurna Arun Kerkar…Caveatrix/
Applicant
Mr. Preet J. Chheda, i/b Divya Shah Associates, for the
Caveatrix/Applicant.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 22nd March 2016
PC:-
1. Heard.
2.The Caveat in this matter came to be filed in rather unusual
circumstances. It seems that the Caveator (the present Applicant)
was never actually served with a citation. Anticipating the
Testamentary Petition, the Caveator filed “a proposed Caveat”.
That Caveat was, therefore, in time. The Caveator did not,
1 of 2
918-CST36-16.DOC
however, had a copy of the Petition and obtaining that copy from
the Court Registry took some time. Hence, the delay.
3.For these reasons and for the reasons also set out in the
Affidavit in Support, the Chamber Summons is made absolute in
terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).
4. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
2 of 2
Shri Uday Rajaram Manjrekar
Annapurna Arun Kerkar
G. S. PATEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court