Disposed

Heena Dhirajlal Manek v. Mahendra Tikamdas Shah and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Mar 2024CRR/20/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a testamentary jurisdiction application seeking deposit and maintenance, respondents consented to interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a). The court directed that Rs. 45,00,000 deposited pursuant to earlier orders be placed in fixed deposit in a nationalised bank, with monthly interest paid to the applicant for day-to-day maintenance. Reply affidavits permitted.

What did the court decide?

Rs. 45,00,000 deposited to be kept in fixed deposit in a nationalised bank; monthly interest paid to applicant for day-to-day maintenance and livelihood.

Heena Dhirajlal Manek vs Mahendra Tikamdas Shah… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

909.CRR.20.2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION

¶3

COURT RECEIVER’S REPORT NO. 20 OF 2024

¶4

WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (LODGING) NO. 18171 OF 2022

¶5

SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI

¶6

Digitally signed by SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI Date: 2024.03.13 16:56:13 +0530

Heena D. Manek

...Petitioner

Versus

Mahendra T. Shah & Ors. ...Respondents

¶11

WITH

¶12

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 97 OF 2023 IN INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1319 OF 2022

¶13

¶14

Mr. Aseem Nafade a/w Mr. Suyash Gadre, Mr. Abhishek Thoke, for Applicant in IAL/18171/2022 and for Respondent No. 1 in IA/97/2023.

¶15

Mr. Tejas V. i/b D.R. Mishra, for Respondent No.1.

¶16

Mr. Shanay Shah a/w Mr. Susmit Phatale, for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

¶17

Mr. Charushila M. Vaidya, 2^nd Assistant to Court Receiver.

¶18

¶19

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : 12^th MARCH, 2024.

¶20

P. C. :

¶21

INTERIM APPLICATION (LODGING) NO. 18171 OF 2022

¶22

This application was adjourned to be heard today, in order

¶23

to facilitate the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to take appropriate directions, at least in respect of the relief sought at prayer clause (a).

¶24

The learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, on instructions, makes a statement that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondents, this Court may grant

Page1 of 3

Shrikant Malani

909.CRR.20.2024.doc

interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) of the present application. It is further submitted that as regards prayer clauses (b), (c) and (d), the respondents may be granted time to file reply affidavit. It is also indicated that the said reply would also deal with Court Receiver’s Report No. 20 of 2024.

¶29

In view of the above, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, there shall be interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads as follows :

¶30

“a) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the aforesaid Miscellaneous Petition, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass an Order and direction to deposit a total sum of Rs. 45,00,000/- (Rupees Forty-Five Lacs only) as deposited by the Respondents pursuant to the orders of this Hon’ble Court into a fixed deposit to be created in a Nationalize Bank and monthly interest accrued thereon be paid to the Applicant on monthly basis for day to day maintenance and livelihood of the Applicant;”

¶31

Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are granted time of three weeks

¶32

to file reply affidavit, insofar as prayer clauses (b), (c) and (d) of the application are concerned.

¶33

List for further consideration on 15^th April, 2024, “High on

¶34

Board.”

¶35

Interim Application No. 97 of 2023, shall also be listed on

Page2 of 3

Shrikant Malani

909.CRR.20.2024.doc

the said date. In the meanwhile, the applicants therein are permitted to file rejoinder affidavit within the aforesaid period of three weeks.

¶40

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶41

Page3 of 3

¶42

Shrikant Malani

Heena Dhirajlal Manek v. Mahendra Tikamdas Shah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heena Dhirajlal Manek v. Mahendra Tikamdas Shah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pravin Shyamrao Wankhede Vs the State of Maharashtra

Abhijit Ashok Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra

Babu Jethalal Patel Vs State of Maharashtra

Satinder Kumar Krishnadev Jhinghan Vs State of Maharashtra

Dolly Makhija@Dolly Pankaj Kalra Vs State of Maharashtra

Asif Mohammad Sharif Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra