Darshan Kaur vs Gulshan Kumar Bhasin — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Darshan Kaur vs Gulshan Kumar Bhasin — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Amendment of the written statement of Defendants no.2, 3(a) and 3(b) allowed, excluding the deleted adverse-possession portions; amendments to be carried out forthwith and within two weeks, with the amended written statement to be served upon the Plaintiff within one week thereafter; re-verification permitted by Defendant no.3(b); Interim Application allowed and disposed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Interim Application No. 3739 of 2024 of the Applicants/original Defendants no.2, 3(a) and 3(b) seeking amendment of their written statement (with the adverse-possession portions of the schedule deleted) should be allowed. +1 more

Court's answer

The Applicants were permitted to give up the amendment with respect to the plea of adverse possession by deleting from the schedule to the application the portion from 'which possession' to 'any other person' and the portion from 'without prejudice' to 'by virtue of adverse possession', to which the Plaintiff's counsel had no objection; the amendments were ordered to be carried out forthwith.

Ratio / Principle

The Interim Application stands allowed.

Key takeaways

The amendments to the written statement of Defendants no.2, 3(a) and 3(b), except the deleted portion, were directed to be carried out within a period of two weeks, and the amended written statement to be served upon the Plaintiff within a period of one week thereafter.ratio¶25
As Defendant no.3(a) lives in the United States and Defendant no.2 is extremely aged, re-verification of the amended proceedings was directed to be verified by Defendant No.3(b), to which the Plaintiff's counsel had no objection.ratio¶27
The Interim Application stands allowed and disposed as above.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Abhay Ahuja, J., 3 April 2025 — Interim Application No. 3739 of 2024 in Suit No. 791 of 2016 (Gulshan Kumar Bhasin, Plaintiff v. Raj Kumar Bhasin and Others, Defendants) — allowed and disposed. The Applicants, original Defendants no.2, 3(a) and 3(b) (Darshan Kaur and others), sought amendment of their written statement. After the matter was heard at length and the Plaintiff's counsel had almost concluded his arguments, the Applicants' counsel offered to give up the amendment with respect to the plea of adverse possession, proposing deletion from the schedule to the application of the portion from 'which possession' to 'any other person' and of the portion from 'without prejudice' to 'by virtue of adverse possession'. The Plaintiff's counsel had no objection. The Court directed the amendments to be carried out forthwith, allowed the Interim Application, ordered that the amendments to the written statement of Defendants no.2, 3(a) and 3(b) (except the deleted portion) be carried out within two weeks and the amended written statement be served upon the Plaintiff within one week thereafter, and, since Defendant no.3(a) lives in the United States and Defendant no.2 is extremely aged, permitted re-verification of the amended proceedings by Defendant no.3(b).

11-IA-3739-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3739 OF 2024 IN

SUIT NO. 791 OF 2016

DARSHAN KAUR AND OTHERS )...APPLICANTS / ORIGINAL DEFENDANTS NO.2, 3(a) & 3(b) IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

MR.GULSHAN KUMAR BHASIN )...PLAINTIFF

V/s.

RAJ KUMAR BHASIN AND OTHERS )...DEFENDANTS

Mr.Nimay Dave a/w. Mr.Anosh Sequeira, Ms.Veena Advani, Advocate for the Applicants/Original Defendants no.2, 3(a) and 3(b).

Mr.Sunny Shah a/w. Mr.Akshay Suresh i/by Ashwin Ankhad & Associates, Advocate for the Plaintiff.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 3^rd APRIL 2025

P.C. :

Digitally ARTIVILASKHATATE signed byARTI VILASKHATATEDate:2025.04.04 13:17:23 +0530

After this matter has been heard at length and after Mr.Shah, learned Counsel for the Plaintiff has almost concluded his arguments, Mr.Dave, learned Counsel, appearing for the Defendants no.2, 3(a) and 3(b) submits that he is willing to give up the amendment with respect to the plea of adverse possession.

avk 1/3

11-IA-3739-2024.doc

Mr.Dave, accordingly, submits that in the schedule to the application of the proposed amendment at (V) the portion starting from “which possession” in the second line till the completion of the sentence in the third line ending with the words “any other person” be deleted. Mr.Dave also submits that in the second last sentence of the said paragraph the portion starting from the words “without prejudice” till the completion of the sentence with the words “by virtue of adverse possession” be also deleted.

Mr.Shah has no objection if the said amendments to the schedule to the Interim Application are allowed.

Let the amendments be carried out forthwith.

Mr.Shah submits that with these amendments carried out on

behalf of the Applicants, the Interim Application can be allowed.

Accordingly, the Interim Application stands allowed.

Let the amendments to the written statement of the Defendants no.2, 3(a) and 3(b), except the deleted portion, be carried out within a avk 2/3

11-IA-3739-2024.doc

period of two weeks. Let the amended written statement be served upon the Plaintiff within a period of one week thereafter.

Mr.Dave submits that since the Defendant no.3(a) lives in the United States and the Defendant no.2 is extremely aged, this Court may permit re-verification by the Defendant no.3(b).

Mr.Shah has no objection if the amended written statement is reverified by the Defendant no.3(b). Let the re-verification of the amended proceedings be verified by Defendant No.3(b).

The Interim Application, accordingly, stands allowed and disposed as above.

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

avk 3/3