Manoj Bharat Kishore Gupta vs Shashibala Bharat Kishore Gupta and 3 Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Manoj Bharat Kishore Gupta vs Shashibala Bharat Kishore Gupta and 3 Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim Application No. 726 of 2025 and Interim Application (L) No. 5254 of 2025 allowed and disposed of; Justice S. J. Kathawalla, former Judge of the Bombay High Court, appointed sole Mediator for all disputes and differences in Suit No. 95 of 2024 and Testamentary Petition No. 1120 of 2024; until the mediation concludes, no withdrawals/transfers from the account except amounts required by Defendant No. 1 in the usual course; mediator's costs, charges and expenses borne 50% by the Plaintiff and 50% by the Defendants; delay in filing written statements of Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 condoned by consent and the written statements taken on record; advocates for the Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1 to jointly approach the Mediator to fix the schedule of mediation.

Issue for consideration

Whether the disputes and differences between the close-family parties in Suit No. 95 of 2024 and Testamentary Petition No. 1120 of 2024 should be submitted to mediation. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court appointed Justice S. J. Kathawalla, former Judge of the Bombay High Court, to act as sole Mediator for resolution of the parties' disputes.

Ratio / Principle

All disputes and differences in the Suit and in the Testamentary Petition stand referred to the learned Mediator; Defendants other than Defendant No. 1, who are residing in the United States, to appear before the Mediator through video conferencing.

Key takeaways

Until the mediation is pending, there shall be no withdrawals or transfers from the account except the amounts required by Defendant No. 1 in the usual course.ratio¶53
The presence of Defendant No. 1 before the Mediator is necessary notwithstanding her advanced age (83 years); the manner of ensuring her participation is left to the learned Mediator.ratio¶55
All necessary costs, charges and expenses of the Mediator are to be borne 50% by the Plaintiff and 50% by the Defendants.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction; Arif S. Doctor, J.) — Interim Application (L) No. 18245 of 2024 in Testamentary Petition No. 1120 of 2024, with Suit No. 95 of 2024, Interim Applications Nos. 3678 of 2024, 726 of 2025, (L) 5254 of 2025, and Caveats Nos. 168 of 2024 and (L) 16131 of 2024. The parties to the Suit and the Testamentary Petition are close family members. On their instructions, learned counsel consented to submit all disputes and differences to mediation. The Court appointed Justice S. J. Kathawalla, former Judge of the Bombay High Court, as sole Mediator and clarified that all disputes and differences in the Suit and the Testamentary Petition shall go before him; Defendants other than Defendant No. 1 (who reside in the United States) to appear through video conferencing, while the presence of Defendant No. 1, aged 83 years, was held necessary, with the mode of her participation left to the Mediator. Until the mediation is pending, no withdrawals/transfers were permitted from the account except the amounts required by Defendant No. 1 in the usual course. The Mediator's costs, charges and expenses are to be borne 50% by the Plaintiff and 50% by the Defendants. It was recorded that Defendant No. 2 has filed a separate probate petition propounding the last Will and Testament of Bharat Kishore Gupta, husband of Defendant No. 1 and father of the Plaintiff and other Defendants. By consent, delay in filing the written statements of Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 was condoned and the written statements taken on record. Interim Application No. 726 of 2025 and Interim Application (L) No. 5254 of 2025 were allowed and disposed of. Note: the order stands modified as per order dated 11th March 2025.

1 38-IA(L)-18245-2024-modified.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 18245 OF 2024

IN

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 1120 OF 2024

Milan Bharat Gupta Versus Ila Bharat Gupta

...Applicant

...Respondent

WITH

SUIT NO. 95 OF 2024

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 726 OF 2025

IN

SUIT NO. 95 OF 2024

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 5254 OF 2025

IN

SUIT NO. 95 OF 2024

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3678 OF 2024

IN

SUIT NO. 95 OF 2024

WITH

CAVEAT NO. 168 OF 2024

WITH

CAVEAT (L) NO. 16131 OF 2024

IN

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 1120 OF 2024

Note: This order is modified as per order dated 11th March 2025. Ajit

1 of 5

2 38-IA(L)-18245-2024-modified.doc

Mr. Pradeep Thorat a/w Rajesh B. Doshi, Neha R. Doshi i/b Legal Juris for the Applicant in IA(L)/18245/2024.

Ms. Poorva Garg a/w Simon Mascarenhas i/b Mulla & Mulla and Craigie Blunt & Caroe for Respondent No. 1 in IA/3678/2024 and for Applicant in IA/726/2025.

Mr. Vivek Kantawala a/w Amey Patil, Manav Kantawala i/b Vivek M. Sharma for the Caveator in CTS(L)/16131/2024, for the Applicant in IA/3678/2024 & for the Plaintiff in S/95/2024.

Ms. Vidya Nair & Nelly Mehta i/b NMA Legal for the Petitioner in TP/1120/2024.

Ms. Kavita A. Shah for Caveator in CTS/168/2024 & for Defendant No. 4 in S/95/2024.

P.C. :

Since the parties to the Suit as also the Testamentary Petition are

close family members, it was put to Learned Counsel as to whether their clients would be willing to submit their disputes and differences to mediation in an

attempt to resolve the same. Learned Counsel, on instructions from their respective clients, submit that their clients are willing to submit their disputes and differences to mediation in an attempt to bring resolution.

I, therefore, appoint Justice S. J. Kathawalla, former Judge of this

Court to act as sole Mediator in an attempt to bring out the resolution between

Note: This order is modified as per order dated 11th March 2025. Ajit

2 of 5

3 38-IA(L)-18245-2024-modified.doc

the parties. The details of learned Mediator are as follows:

Name : Justice S. J. Kathawalla , Former Judge of Bombay High Court. Address : 43, Free Press House, 4th Floor, Free Press Journal Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 Mobile No. : 9619180563 Email ID : [email protected]

It is therefore clarified that all the disputes and differences in the Suit and also in the Testamentary Petition shall be gone for resolution before the learned Mediator. Since I am informed that except of Defendant No. 1 the other Defendants were residing in the United States, they shall be appeared before the learned Mediator through video conferencing.

On a copy of this order being uploaded, the advocates for the Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1 shall jointly approach to learned Mediator for fixing the schedule of mediation.

All the necessary costs, charges and expenses of the Mediator to be borne 50% by the Plaintiff and 50% by the Defendants.

Note: This order is modified as per order dated 11th March 2025. Ajit

3 of 5

4 38-IA(L)-18245-2024-modified.doc

Since the parties have today agreed to submit their disputes and difference to mediation, it is made clear that until the mediation is pending, there shall be no withdrawals/transfers from the account excepts the amounts thay are required by Defendant No. 1 in the usual cause.

At this stage, Learned Counsel for Defendant No. 2 submit that Defendant No. 2 has also filed a probate petition, in which she has propounded the last Will and Testament of one Bharat Kishore Gupta, who is the husband of Defendant No. 1 and father of the Plaintiff and other Defendants.

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Defendant No. 1 also submits that Defendant No. 1 is 83 years of age and would have some difficult in appearing before the Mediator. However, in my view, the presence of Defendant No. 1 would be necessary and needless to state that it is up to Learned Mediator how to best ensure the participation of Defendant No. 1 given her advanced age.

Learned Counsel for Defendant Nos.1 and 2 submits that they have filed interim applications for condonation of delay in filing their respective written statements and the same shall be taken on record. To this, Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff does not have any objection. Hence, by

Note: This order is modified as per order dated 11th March 2025. Ajit

4 of 5

5 38-IA(L)-18245-2024-modified.doc

consent, delay in filing the written statements of Defendant Nos.1 and 2 is condoned and the same are taken on record.

Interim application No.726 of 2025 and Interim application (L) No.5254 of 2025 are allowed and accordingly disposed of.

(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)

Note: This order is modified as per order dated 11th March 2025. Ajit

5 of 5