Allowed

Ashalata H. Mhatre v. 1a) Shailaja Pradip Jog and Ors.

Bombay HC10 Oct 2024IA/887/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim applications in a testamentary suit seeking permission to implead proposed defendants as legal representatives. Court allowed amendments to implead heirs and granted leave to file affidavit of service.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to amend plaint and implead proposed defendants with a three-week deadline for service.

Ashalata H. Mhatre vs 1a) Shailaja Pradip Jog and… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

20-ia-887-2024.doc

¶2

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

¶3

VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR

¶4

Digitally signed by VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR

¶5

Date: 2024.11.24 10:57:13 +0530

¶6

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.887 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3638 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3637 OF 2023 IN TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO.02 OF 1997 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.350 OF 1994

¶7

...Applicant/ Plaintiff

¶8

Ashalata H. Mhatre @ Kandivalikar

¶9

vs.

¶10

Chitra Ganesh Vaidya and Others ...Defendants And Varsha Roy and Another ...Respondents

¶11

Mr. Sandesh Kamble i/b. Ms. Shubhangi Abhyankar, for the Applicant/ Plaintiff.

¶12

CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 21, 2024

¶13

P.C.:

¶14

IA No. 887 of 2024 :-

¶15

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the

¶17

proposed defendant Nos. 3a to 3c have been duly served and affidavit of service has been filed on the previous date.

¶18

Mr. S.S.Redekar had appeared before the Court and made

¶19

submission that he had instruction to appear on behalf of the proposed defendant Nos. 3a to 3c and undertook to file vakalatnama

Vishal Parekar, PS

...1

20-ia-887-2024.doc

and affidavit in reply.

¶24

It does not appear that vakalatnama and affidavit in reply on behalf of defendant Nos. 3a to 3c has been filed. None appear for proposed defendant Nos. 3a and 3b.

¶25

For the reasons assigned in the application and to advance the cause of substantive justice, the delay in taking out the application to set aside the abatement and bring the legal heirs of defendant No. 3 stands allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (c).

¶26

The applicant/plaintiff is permitted to amend the plaint and implead the proposed defendant Nos. 3a to 3c as the legal representatives of defendant No. 3 in accordance with the Schedule of Amendment (Exhibit B).

¶27

Necessary amendment be carried out within a period of three weeks and amended copy be served on all the defendants within a period of three weeks thereafter.

¶28

Application disposed.

¶29

IA No. 3638 of 2023 :-

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶31

This application is preferred to bring the legal representative

¶32

of defendant No. 2b Devdas Krushnarao Kandivalikar who has

Vishal Parekar, PS

...2

20-ia-887-2024.doc

passed away on 2^nd September, 2022.

¶37

The learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff submits that the legal representative of the deceased defendant No. 2b have been served and seeks leave to file affidavit of service.

¶38

Leave granted.

¶39

Affidavit of service is taken on record.

¶40

It appears that the proposed defendant Nos. 2b(i) to 2b(iii) have been served. None appear for the proposed defendant Nos. 2b(i) to 2b(iii).

¶41

The application is within the stipulated period of limitation.

¶42

The application thus stands allowed in terms of prayer clause

¶43

(a).

¶44

Necessary amendment so as to implead the legal representative of deceased defendant No. 2b in accordance with the Schedule of Amendment (Exhibit B) be carried out within a period of three weeks and amended copy of the plaint be served on all the defendants within a period of three weeks thereafter.

¶45

Application disposed.

¶46

IA No. 3637 of 2023 :-

¶47

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶48

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the notices

Vishal Parekar, PS

...3

20-ia-887-2024.doc

were issued to defendant Nos. 1g(i) to 1g(v).

¶53

The notices have been duly served on the proposed defendant

¶54

Nos. 1g(iv) and 1g(v). The notices to proposed defendant Nos. 1g(i) and 1g(ii) are returned unclaimed.

¶55

The learned counsel seeks leave to tender affidavit of service.

¶56

Leave granted.

¶57

Affidavit of service is taken on record.

¶58

None appears for the proposed defendants who seem to have been served.

¶59

To rule out the possibility of prejudice, stand over to 12^th

December, 2024.

(N. J. JAMADAR, J.)

Vishal Parekar, PS

...4

Ashalata H. Mhatre v. 1a) Shailaja Pradip Jog and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashalata H. Mhatre v. 1a) Shailaja Pradip Jog 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

Reshma Prashant Nair through Power of Attoreny Holder Ramsujan Karkera vs Prashant Nair Alias Prashant Venugopal Nair (Deceased)

Chemco Plastic Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs Chemco Plast

Nandini Nandakishore Shelte vs Sadanand Bapu Chindarkar (Deceased)

Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited vs Atria Brindavan Power Private Limited

Anil Alias Ganesh Janardhan Gavde vs 1(A) Vaishali Rajendra Gavde and Ors.

Santosh Prajapati S/O. Late Mr. Shayam Lal Prajapati vs the State of Maharashtra