Allowed

Amul Jagjivandas Parekh v. Girish Jagjivandas Parekh and Ors.

Bombay HC23 Jan 2024IA/3158/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant in a testamentary suit sought to amend the cause title after defendant No. 1's death, bringing four legal representatives on record. The court allowed the application, permitted deletion of defendant No. 1 and substitution of proposed defendants 1A to 1D, with amendment within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Cause title amended: defendant No. 1 deleted; proposed defendants 1A to 1D substituted; amendment within two weeks; re-verification dispensed with.

Amul Jagjivandas Parekh Vs Girish Jagjivandas… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

3.IA.3158.2021.doc

¶2

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

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3158 OF 2021

¶4

IN TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO. 230 OF 2016 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 604 OF 2016

¶5

Amul Jagjivandas Parekh ...Applicant/Plaintiff

¶6

SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI

¶7

Digitally signed by SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI Date: 2024.01.24 13:06:20 +0530

¶8

Versus

¶9

Girish Jagjivandas Parekh & Ors. ...Defendants

¶10

And

¶11

Sohini Girish Parekh & Ors. ...Prop. Respondents ***

¶12

 Ms. Sapna Sharma i/b M/s. K. Ashar & Co., for Applicant /Plaintiff.  Ms. Sakshi Agarwal i/b Bipin Joshi, for proposed Respondents. ***

¶13

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J DATE : 23^rd JANUARY, 2024.

¶14

P. C. :

¶15

By this application, the applicant / plaintiff is seeking to amend the cause title of the suit in the light of death of defendant No. 1 during the pendency of the suit. The applicant desires to bring on record four legal representatives of the deceased defendant No.1.

¶16

Copy of death certificate is annexed to the application

¶17

showing that the defendant No.1 expired on 17^th August, 2020.

¶18

The names of the proposed defendant Nos. 1A and 1D are stated in the application. The learned counsel having instructions to

Page1 of 2

Shrikant

3.IA.3158.2021.doc

appear on behalf of the proposed defendants has pointed out that there are typographical errors insofar as the names of the proposed defendant Nos. 1B and 1D are concerned. In that light, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant / plaintiff has tendered Exhibit “B” afresh, incorporating the corrections in the names of the proposed defendant Nos. 1B and 1D. The aforesaid document is taken on record and marked “X” in the interest of justice.

¶23

In view of the above, the application is allowed and the defendant No.1 is permitted to be deleted from the cause title of the suit and the names of the proposed defendant Nos. 1A to 1D, as stated in the document tendered in Court, are permitted to be substituted in the place of defendant No. 1.

¶24

5. The application stands allowed in above terms.

¶25

The amendment be carried out within two weeks from today. Re-verification is dispensed with.

¶26

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶27

Page2 of 2

¶28

Shrikant

Amul Jagjivandas Parekh v. Girish Jagjivandas Parekh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amul Jagjivandas Parekh v. Girish Jagjivandas Parekh and Ors.

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

Similar cases

Aditya Sunil Aka Suneel Rege Vs Shantaram Shankar Rege (Deceased)

Baburao Parshuram Desai Vs Tulsabai Parshuram Desai Alias T. P. Desai (Deceased)

Bai Rabiabai Wd/O Ebrahim Mia Mohammed Haji Janmohammed Chotani and 3 Ors. Vs the Official Assignee and Bishops Education Society (Intervenor)

Bhavesh Prakash Bhansali vs Prakash Shivlal Bhansali

Rajendra Yashvantrao Rajeshirke Vs Yashvantrao Manysaheb Rajeshirke (Deceased)

Chandrahas Arvind Kolhatkar Vs Sharad Ramchandra Kolhatkar (Deceased)