Ashok Baba ZinjeVsJitendra Amritlal Sheth And Ors

Date: 04-07-2018
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 31-07-2018

Date: 31-07-2018
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 27-08-2018

Date: 27-08-2018
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 08-10-2018

Date: 08-10-2018
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2018

Date: 21-11-2018
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 15-01-2019

Date: 15-01-2019
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 22-02-2019

Date: 22-02-2019
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 26-04-2019

Date: 26-04-2019
Business: Resumed.
Plaintiff in person is present.  Adv. Robin Jaisinghani I/b Adv. P. D Patel for defe. Nos. 4 to 6 tendered draft NM with affidavit seeking dismissal of suit as having been abated.  Leave to register is granted.  Copy of NM and affidavit served on Plaintiff.
Adjd for NM reply to 23.07.2019.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 23-07-2019

Date: 23-07-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. Pai for Plaintiff present
Advocate Mr. Robin Jaisinghani for Defendant no.4 to 6 present and filed registered Notice of Motion no.2042/2019 with affidavit in support, t.o.r.
Heard advocate for Defendant no.6 in respect of NM no.2503/16. According to Defendants advocate, as Defendant no.1 and 3 died in 2013 the suit is abated long back and it can not survives against Defendant no.6 who is the subsequent purchaser.  It is argued that in view of section 6(3) of Hindu Succession Act the suit property admittedly being HUF property, unless all the co-parshioners even in the form of their LRs are impleaded or brought on record, the suit can not proceed.  As such arguments partly heard.
Case is adjourned to 05/08/2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 05-08-2019

Date: 05-08-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. Joshi for Plaintiff present and filed reply to NM no.2042/19, t.o.r.
Advocate D\'' silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present
K.B.
L.O.
Advocate Mr. Pai for Plaintiff present and filed reply to NM no.2042/19, t.o.r.
Advocate Mr. Robin Jaisinghani for Defendant no.4 to 6 present
Heard advocate Mr. Pay who submitted that ad interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) and (e) of NM no.2105/18 should be granted till disposal of the NM.
This is the case in which 3 Nms i.e. NM no.2503/16, NM no.2105/18 and NM no.2042/19 are pending.  Reply to NM no.2042/19 is filed by Plaintiff\''s advocate today.  Already this court has directed Defendants advocate to argue about all 3 Nms and arguments of advocate of Defendants are partly heard. Meanwhile, Plaintiff has filed reply to one of the 3 Nms, therefore Defendants advocate sought time to advanced further arguments because Defendants advocate is intending to file rejoinder to the reply filed by Plaintiff today.  In such circumstances, it becomes clear that when Plaintiff himself has filed reply today, now he can not ask for ad-interim relief when court has already asked parties to argue and get decided all 3 Nms together, hence ad interim reliefs as prayed can not be granted.  It is made clear that, on next date, court will hear arguments of Defendants advocate, therefore Plaintiff will get opportunity to reply Defendants argument as well as to advance arguments about NM no.2105/18 and all the 3 Nms will be decided on merits because pleadings of all 3 NMs are completed.
Plaintiff\''s advocate filed reply to the further/ additional affidavit filed by Defendant in support of NM no.2503/16, t.o.r.  Copy served upon Defendants advocate.
Case is adjourned to 16/09/2019 for Hearing of NM.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 16-09-2019

Date: 16-09-2019
Business: Court is busy in recording evidence in suit no.7793/00 and suit no.9168/92, hence case is adjourned
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 21-10-2019

Date: 21-10-2019
Business: As holiday was declared on 21/10/2019, on account of Vidhansabha Election, matter is taken on today\''s board and adjourned
L.O.
Advocate Sidhant Joshi for Plaintiff present and filed pursis contending that Plaintiff had filed appeal from order for challenging the order dated 05/08/2019 passed by this Court in suit bearing stamp no.25182/19 and on 30/09/2019 Hon\''ble High Court is pleased to direct this Court to expedite hearing of Notice of Motion no.2503/16, 2042/19 and 2105/18 pending in this suit, as early as possible preferably by 31/01/2020 and computerized copy of Hon\''ble High Court is annexed to the pursis.  Plaintiff is directed to serve copy of pursis along with order of Hon\''ble High Court upon Defendants.
Case is already adjourned to 07/12/2019.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 07-12-2019

Date: 07-12-2019
Business: Advocate Siddhant Joshi for Plaintiff present
Advocate J. D\''Silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present
Court is busy in hearing Notice of Motion in suit no.4705/08 and court has to dictate order on Notice of Motion in suit no.9376/95 and Judgment in suit no.8136/86, hence case is adjourned to 17/12/2019.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 17-12-2019

Date: 17-12-2019
Business: Plaintiff with advocate Siddhant Joshi for plaintiff present
Defendant no.6 present.
Court is busy dictating Judgment in suit no.8136/86, hence case is adjourned to 06/01/2020.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 06-01-2020

Date: 06-01-2020
Business: None present for Plaintiff.
None present for Defendant.
K.B. at the matter is HC time bound.
L.O.
Advocate Mr. Sidhant Joshi for Plaintiff present.
None present for Defendant no.6.  Already, arguments of NM no.2503/16 are partly advanced by Defendant no.6.  As per order of Hon\''ble High Court all Nms are to be disposed off before 31/01/2020 and as no one is present for Defendant no.6, it is made clear that, if on next date, Defendants will not argue Nms, Plaintiff\''s arguments about all Nms will be heard and Nms will be disposed off.
Case is adjourned to 14/01/2020 for NM for hearing.
L.O.
Advocate Ms. J. D\''silva for Defendant nos.4 to 6 present
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 14-01-2020

Date: 14-01-2020
Business: Plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. J. D\''silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present.
Plaintiff and advocate for Defendant no.4 to 6 submitted that consent terms are already filed by Plaintiff and Defendant no.1 to 3 on record and further Plaintiff and Defendant no.4 to 6 are discussing about the settlement in the matter, hence matter may be adjourned.
This is the HC time bound mater and NM is necessary to be disposed off up to 31/01/2020 hence parties are directed to file settlement terms on 20/01/2020 else to proceed with the NM arguments so that it can be disposed off within stipulated time granted by Hon\''ble High Court.
Case is adjourned to 20/01/2020 for Settlement/NM for hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 20-01-2020

Date: 14-01-2020
Business: Plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. J. D\''silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present.
Plaintiff and advocate for Defendant no.4 to 6 submitted that consent terms are already filed by Plaintiff and Defendant no.1 to 3 on record and further Plaintiff and Defendant no.4 to 6 are discussing about the settlement in the matter, hence matter may be adjourned.
This is the HC time bound mater and NM is necessary to be disposed off up to 31/01/2020 hence parties are directed to file settlement terms on 20/01/2020 else to proceed with the NM arguments so that it can be disposed off within stipulated time granted by Hon\''ble High Court.
Case is adjourned to 20/01/2020 for Settlement/NM for hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 20-01-2020

Date: 14-01-2020
Business: Plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. J. D\''silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present.
Plaintiff and advocate for Defendant no.4 to 6 submitted that consent terms are already filed by Plaintiff and Defendant no.1 to 3 on record and further Plaintiff and Defendant no.4 to 6 are discussing about the settlement in the matter, hence matter may be adjourned.
This is the HC time bound mater and NM is necessary to be disposed off up to 31/01/2020 hence parties are directed to file settlement terms on 20/01/2020 else to proceed with the NM arguments so that it can be disposed off within stipulated time granted by Hon\''ble High Court.
Case is adjourned to 20/01/2020 for Settlement/NM for hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 20-01-2020

Date: 14-01-2020
Business: Plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. J. D\''silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present.
Plaintiff and advocate for Defendant no.4 to 6 submitted that consent terms are already filed by Plaintiff and Defendant no.1 to 3 on record and further Plaintiff and Defendant no.4 to 6 are discussing about the settlement in the matter, hence matter may be adjourned.
This is the HC time bound mater and NM is necessary to be disposed off up to 31/01/2020 hence parties are directed to file settlement terms on 20/01/2020 else to proceed with the NM arguments so that it can be disposed off within stipulated time granted by Hon\''ble High Court.
Case is adjourned to 20/01/2020 for Settlement/NM for hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 20-01-2020

Date: 20-01-2020
Business: Advocate Mr. Pai for Plaintiff present
Advocate Mr. Devansh Mehta for Defendant no.6 present and submitted that counsel who is going to argue Notice of Motions is gone to Alibaug, hence matter may be adjourned.  Notice of Motions in this suit is Hon\''ble High Court time bound, hence no further adjmt can be granted.
Heard arguments of advocate for Plaintiff submitted that Notice of Motion nos.2503/16 and 2042/19 are taken out by Defendant no.6 for dismissal of suit u/s 151 of CPC.  It is pointed out that Notice of Motion no.2503/16 is taken out on the ground that suit property is vested with Defendant nos.4 and 5 and then with Defendant no.6 who purchased larger property from Defendant nos.4 and 5.  It is further contended by Defendant no.6 that cause of action in present suit is not surviving due to the events referred by Plaintiff himself and Notice of Motion no.2042/18 is taken out for dismissal of the suit on the ground that suit property is co-partionary property and all the members of co-partionary  are not impleded in this suit therefore suit is necessary to be dismissed for want of non-joinder of necessary parties.  It is submitted that the suit is filed considering the fact  that KARTA of HUF has executed agreement in favour of Plaintiff and therefore after death of Defendant nos.1 and 3 Defendant no.2 who is the KARTA of family is representing the HUF and the reliefs claimed against Defendant nos.4 to 6 also survive.  Plaintiff\''s advocate referred the documents annexed to the plaint, particularly the agreement of March 1972, the unilateral conformation deed of 1994 executed by Plaintiff, the lease agreement father of Defendant nos.4 and 5 on one side and Defendant no.6 on other side.  Plaintiff advocate also referred the electrify bills showing that Plaintiff is paying electricity charges of suit premises since 1991.  Lastly it is submitted that section 151 will not come into the play against Plaintiff for dismissal of the suit.  Plaintiff\''s advocate argued that injunction as prayed by Plaintiff in Notice of Motion no.2105/18 is necessary to be granted to protect Plaintiff\''s possession over suit premises because Defendant nos.4 to 6 had the notice of Plaintiff\''s possession even at the time of execution of lease deed executed by father of  Defendant nos.4 and 5 in favour of Defendant no.6.  It is further pointed out the Defendant no.2 has executed registered conveyance deed in favour of Plaintiff in view of the consent terms between Plaintiff and Defendant no.2 filed in the court in January 2014 and accepted by the court in the March 2014.
Plaintiff\''s argument about all the three Nms i.e. Notice of Motion no.2503/16, 2105/18 and 2042/19 are heard.  As advocate for Defendant no.6 once again prayed for adjmt and has not argued the matter today matter  to proceed for order on all three Nms as they are time bound and necessary to be decided as per order of Hon\''ble High Court before 31/01/2020.
Case is adjourned to 22/01/2020 for order on NM nos. 2503/16, 2105/18 and 2042/19.  It is made clear that, if prior to starting the dictation of orders in respect of all 3 Nms if Defendant no.6 will argue the Nms his submissions will be considered for decision of all Nms.
Next Purpose: NM  ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 22-01-2020

Date: 22-01-2020
Business: Plaintiff with advocate Mr. Pai for Plaintiff present.
Counsel Mr. Robin Jaisinghani with advocate Ms. J. D\''Silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present and argued about the Nms.  He has referred amended section 6(3) of Hindu Succession Act and argued that after 90 days of the death of Defendant nos.1 and 3 partition of their share from suit property has already taken place, hence LRs of those Defendants who were having their respective shares were necessary to be brought on record and Plaintiff has not brought them on record, therefore abatement of the suit against Defendant nos.1 and 3 will have the effect that suit will have to be dismissed against all the Defendants because joint decree of specific performance of contract along with some ancillary reliefs is sought by Plaintiff.  As such arguments heard.
Case is adjourned to 23/01/2020 for order on Notice of Motions.
Next Purpose: NM  ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 23-01-2020

Date: 22-01-2020
Business: Plaintiff with advocate Mr. Pai for Plaintiff present.
Counsel Mr. Robin Jaisinghani with advocate Ms. J. D\''Silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present and argued about the Nms.  He has referred amended section 6(3) of Hindu Succession Act and argued that after 90 days of the death of Defendant nos.1 and 3 partition of their share from suit property has already taken place, hence LRs of those Defendants who were having their respective shares were necessary to be brought on record and Plaintiff has not brought them on record, therefore abatement of the suit against Defendant nos.1 and 3 will have the effect that suit will have to be dismissed against all the Defendants because joint decree of specific performance of contract along with some ancillary reliefs is sought by Plaintiff.  As such arguments heard.
Case is adjourned to 23/01/2020 for order on Notice of Motions.
Next Purpose: NM  ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 23-01-2020

Date: 22-01-2020
Business: Plaintiff with advocate Mr. Pai for Plaintiff present.
Counsel Mr. Robin Jaisinghani with advocate Ms. J. D\''Silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present and argued about the Nms.  He has referred amended section 6(3) of Hindu Succession Act and argued that after 90 days of the death of Defendant nos.1 and 3 partition of their share from suit property has already taken place, hence LRs of those Defendants who were having their respective shares were necessary to be brought on record and Plaintiff has not brought them on record, therefore abatement of the suit against Defendant nos.1 and 3 will have the effect that suit will have to be dismissed against all the Defendants because joint decree of specific performance of contract along with some ancillary reliefs is sought by Plaintiff.  As such arguments heard.
Case is adjourned to 23/01/2020 for order on Notice of Motions.
Next Purpose: NM  ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 23-01-2020

Date: 22-01-2020
Business: Plaintiff with advocate Mr. Pai for Plaintiff present.
Counsel Mr. Robin Jaisinghani with advocate Ms. J. D\''Silva for Defendant no.4 to 6 present and argued about the Nms.  He has referred amended section 6(3) of Hindu Succession Act and argued that after 90 days of the death of Defendant nos.1 and 3 partition of their share from suit property has already taken place, hence LRs of those Defendants who were having their respective shares were necessary to be brought on record and Plaintiff has not brought them on record, therefore abatement of the suit against Defendant nos.1 and 3 will have the effect that suit will have to be dismissed against all the Defendants because joint decree of specific performance of contract along with some ancillary reliefs is sought by Plaintiff.  As such arguments heard.
Case is adjourned to 23/01/2020 for order on Notice of Motions.
Next Purpose: NM  ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 23-01-2020

Date: 23-01-2020
Business: Advocate for Plaintiff present
Advocate for Defendant present
Dictation of Notice of Motion no.2047/2019 started but court was required to hear urgent Notice of Motion in suit no.201/2020, hence case is adjourned to 24/01/2020 for order on Notice of Motion.
Next Purpose: NM  ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 24-01-2020

Date: 23-01-2020
Business: Advocate for Plaintiff present
Advocate for Defendant present
Dictation of Notice of Motion no.2047/2019 started but court was required to hear urgent Notice of Motion in suit no.201/2020, hence case is adjourned to 24/01/2020 for order on Notice of Motion.
Next Purpose: NM  ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 24-01-2020

Date: 24-01-2020
Business: None present Plaintiff.
None present for Defendants.
F.R.S.R. following order has passed-
                     ORDER ON NM 2042 OF 2019
Notice of Motion no.2042 of 2019 stands disposed off / dismissed.
                     ORDER ON NM 2503 OF 2016
Notice of Motion no.2503 of 2016 stands disposed off / dismissed.
                    ORDER ON NM 2105 OF 2018
Notice of Motion no.2105 of 2018 is made absolute in terms of prayer cases (a) and (b) only.  It is made clear that, Notice of Motion No.2105 of 2018 stands dismissed in respect of prayer clauses (c) to (e) of the Notice of Motion.
Case is adjourned to  for 23/03/2020 for Steps.
Nature Of Disposal: ALLOWED
Disposal Date: 24-01-2020

Registration Number: 102105/2018
Transfer Date: 12-06-2019
From Court: 1 - COURT 01 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE
To Court: 9 - COURT 09 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE

Filing Number: 107494/2018
Filing Date: 08-06-2018
First Hearing Date: 04th July 2018
Decision Date: 24th January 2020
Court Number And Judge: 9-COURT 09 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE