Subhash Shankar Patkar vs Ramesh Pundalik Malvankar (Decaed)

By an order dated 7^th December, 2015 the Letters of Administration was granted. In the application it is averred that it transpired that the petitioner has not included 400 shares of TATA Power Limited in Schedule-I appended to the petition. It is, therefore, necessary to amend Schedule-I and also the Letters of Administration.

¶17

Perused the application and the documents annexed to

¶18

it. It appears that the movable property belonging to the

¶19

1/2

¶20

15-IA1585-2024NTP1359-14.DOC

¶21

deceased was inadvertently not mentioned in Schedule-I

¶22

appended to the petition. I do not find any impediment in allowing the application.

¶23

Hence, the following order:

¶24

: O R D E R :

¶25

(i) The application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶26

(ii) Necessary amendment be carried out in Schedule-I of the property appended to the petition within a period of

¶27

three weeks.

¶28

(iii) Post amendment, grant be issued.

¶29

Application disposed.

¶30

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

¶31

2/2

Subhash Shankar Patkar v. Ramesh Pundalik Malvankar (Decaed)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Shankar Patkar v. Ramesh Pundalik Malvankar (Decaed)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pritam Chandulal Oswal vs State of Maharashtra

Neeta Dattu Alhat - Applicant vs Anita Dattu Alhat - Deceased

Deepak Ambalal Solani vs Jasiben Ambalal Solanki (Deceased)

Prem S. Motiramani vs the Custodian

Santosh Eknath Dhanawade vs Eknath Dashrath Dhanawade (Deceased)

Deepak Rajaram Raorane vs Sulochana Rajaram Raorane (Deceased)