The High Court of Bombay allowed the appellant to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the related Notice of Motion was disposed of. The court directed parties to explore mediation for final settlement due to the appellant's age (79 years).
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.
905appl318-18-nmal714-18.doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL (LODG)NO.318 OF 2018 IN CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.53 OF 2018 IN TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO.11 OF 1995 IN PETITION NO.160 OF 1994
Vijaykumar Janardan Pandit.
...Appellant
Versus
Ojaswini Kamlakar Samant ...Respondent
with NOTICE OF MOTION (Lodg) No.714 of 2018
Mr.Hemant Mehta i/b. Mehta & Co., for the Appellant/Applicant.
Ms.Deepa Chavan with Ravindra R.Chile with Shristi Shetty and Gargi Bhagwat, i/b. M/s.Divekar Bhagwat & Co., for the Respondent.
CORAM: NARESH H.PATIL AND G.S.KULKARNI, JJ DATED: 26th JULY, 2018
P.C.:
2 905appl318-18-nmal714-18.doc
two weeks time to carry out amendment. Leave granted. Amendment be carried out within a period of one week from today.
905appl318-18-nmal714-18.doc
3
Prashant Vilas Rane
the alternate method of resolution of dispute by referring the matter to
learned Mediator.
Digitally signed by Prashant Vilas Rane Date: 2018.08.02 12:14:13 +0530
(G.S.KULKARNI, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)
Vijaykumar Janardan Pandit
Ojaswini Kamlakar Samant
NARESH H.PATIL
G.S.KULKARNI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
