Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1 Common Order in Ch/s No.2284/18 and
Ch/s No. 698/19 in S.C.Suit No. 1583/14.
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT MUMBAI.
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 2284 OF 2018
(CNR NO. MHCC010155392018)
Deepa Devanand Gaikwad and another ]....Plaintiffs
V/s
Michael Sebsten Joseph ]....Since Deceased &
Sole Defendant
AND
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 698 OF 2019
(CNR NO. MHCC010035732019)
IN
SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO. 1583 OF 2014
Joanita Murray and another ]...Applicants
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Deepa Devanand Gaikwad and another ]....Plaintiffs
V/s
Michael Sebastian Joseph ]....Defendants
Appearances:
Ld. Advocate Mr. Mendadkar for the Plaintiff.
Ld. Advocate Mr. Anukul Seth for the Applicants/Proposed Defendants.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI C.V. MARATHE
(Court Room no. 4)
DATED : 22nd JANUARY, 2020.
-- 1 of 4 --
2 Common Order in Ch/s No.2284/18 and
Ch/s No. 698/19 in S.C.Suit No. 1583/14.
C O M M O N O R A L O R D E R
1. Plaintiffs have taken out Chamber Summons No.
2284/2018 under Order XXII Rule 4A of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
(hereinafter ‘CPC’) to appoint the Administrator General or any officer
of this Court or any other person whom the Court thinks fit to represent
the deceased sole defendant for the purpose of suit premises as there is
no legal representative of the said defendant.
2. The applicants/proposed defendants have filed Chamber
Summons No. 698/2019 claiming that they are legal representatives of
deceased defendant on the basis of registered Will Deed dated
03/01/2018 and they were also staying with the deceased defendant on
the date of filing of suit as well as when the defendant died.
3. Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs has argued that if the
applicants are claiming legacy on the basis of unprobated Will, they
cannot be permitted to be parties in this suit because the properties are
situated in Mumbai and the unprobated Will cannot have any sanctity
in law. Ld. Advocate for the applicants has relied upon judgment of
Hon'ble Apex Court in Suresh Kumar Bansal V/s. Krishna Bansal And
Another [(2010) 2 Supreme Court Cases 162] wherein it is observed
that the legal representatives of the deceased can be impleaded subject
-- 2 of 4 --
3 Common Order in Ch/s No.2284/18 and
Ch/s No. 698/19 in S.C.Suit No. 1583/14.
to grant of probate by competent Court of Law.
4. In view of above judgment, the course is open to the Court
to allow impleadment of applicants as defendants in the suit and
thereafter proceed with the suit.
5. The plaintiffs are claiming declaration that the gift deed of
the suit property executed by deceased defendant dated 05/02/2010 is
valid. Now the applicants allege that the suit property is bequeathed to
them by the defendant by executing Will Deed. Therefore, there is now
a title dispute between the parties. If the applicants will not be allowed
in this suit, there will be multiplicity of proceedings. Therefore the
order :
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No. 698/2019 is allowed and made
absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) and Chamber
Summons No. 2284/2018 is rejected.
2. Plaint be amended before next date.
(C. V. Marathe)
Judge,
Date : 22.01.2020. City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on : 22.01.2020.
Transcribed on : 22.01.2020.
Signed by HHJ on : 23.01.2020.
-- 3 of 4 --
4 Common Order in Ch/s No.2284/18 and
Ch/s No. 698/19 in S.C.Suit No. 1583/14.
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME : 28.01.2020 at 3.09 p.m.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER : Miss M.A.Kulkarni
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room no.)
HHJ Shri. C. V. Marathe
C.R. no.04
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
22/01/2020
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
23/01/2020
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
28/01/2020
-- 4 of 4 --