Final Order 2

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: Ch.Sum No. 1450/2019 in
S.C. Suit No.964/2015. 1 Order.
MHCC010081652019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1450 OF 2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO. 964 OF 2015
Ms. Minakshi Raja ...Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
Mrs. Nivedita Dhimant Malvi ... Plaintiff
V/s.
1. Mr. Lalit Sharma
2. H.T. Nanavati Security Pvt. Ltd.
3. Ms. Minakshi Raja
... Defendants
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI N.G.SHUKLA
CITY CIVIL COURT, GR.BOMBAY
(C.R. NO.63).
DATE : 23/08/2023.
Appearance:-
Ld. Advocate Shri Rohan Karande i/b M/s. Divekar for the plaintiff.
None for defendant No.3/applicant.
-- 1 of 5 --
Ch.Sum No. 1450/2019 in
S.C. Suit No.964/2015. 2 Order.
ORDER
1. Defendant No.3 in this suit had taken out this Chamber
Summons for transposition of herself as plaintiff in view of death of
original plaintiff and consequential amendment in the plaint. Defendant
No.1 filed reply affidavit and contested the chamber summons.
2. I have heard Ld. Advocate Shri Rohan Karande for the
defendant No.3. Advocate for defendant No.1 is absent when called to
argue on chamber summons. Hence, I have proceeded to dispose off
chamber summons on merit by considering the affidavit in reply of
defendant No.1.
3. Plaintiff has filed present suit for declaration that plaintiff
and defendant No.3 are jointly entitled to the shares of three companies
described in Exh.D annexed with the plaint. Defendant No.1 contested
the suit. During pendency of the suit, plaintiff died. The shares
described in Exh.D were belonging to late Udayan Desai. After his
death, Mrs. Nirmala Desai had filed petition for Letter of Administration
to the estate of Udayan Desai. Defendant No.3 is sister of original
plaintiff. In the proceeding of Letter of Administration, settlement was
arrived between the parties and consent terms were filed. As per the
said consent terms, the shares described in Exh.D were gone to the
share of plaintiff and defendant No.3. On the basis of these facts, after
death of plaintiff, now defendant No.3 is seeking to transpose herself as
plaintiff to continue the suit.
-- 2 of 5 --
Ch.Sum No. 1450/2019 in
S.C. Suit No.964/2015. 3 Order.
4. Defendant No.1 opposed the chamber summons on the
ground that, it is based on misconceived footing. After death of original
plaintiff, suit become infructuous and liable to be dismissed. Defendant
No. 3 has no any right to represent the plaintiff and right to sue shall
not survive to defendant No.3. Therefore, defendant No.1 prayed to
dismiss the chamber summons.
5. I have considered submissions of advocate for the
defendant No.3 i.e. applicant in chamber summons and contentions in
the reply affidavit. It appears from the copy of consent terms,
Testamentary Petition was filed by Nirmala D. Desai, wherein plaintiff
and defendant No.3 were parties. It appears from order dtd.29.10.2013
passed in Testamentary Petition that, parties to the said proceeding had
settled the dispute and consent terms were taken on record and the said
proceeding was disposed off as per the consent terms.
6. It appears from the consent terms that, the property and
estate standing in the name of deceased Udayan Desai described in
Schedule-B of the consent terms were granted in favour of and
defendant No.1 and 3 in the suit proceeding i. e. present original
plaintiff and defendant No.3. The present suit is only in respect of 219
shares of Goodlass Nerolac Eqy. (Now Kansai Nerolac Plaint Ltd.), 109
shares of Nestle India Ltd. and 318 shares of TATA Chemicals EQ. As
per Schedule-B annexed with the consent terms said shares were
allotted to original plaintiff and defendant No.3 in the settlement. In
view of such circumstances, defendant No.3 has right to continue the
suit as legal representative of plaintiff. Therefore, I do not find
-- 3 of 5 --
Ch.Sum No. 1450/2019 in
S.C. Suit No.964/2015. 4 Order.
substance in the contention raised by the defendant No.1 in reply
affidavit. Chamber Summons deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I pass
following order :
- ORDER -
1. Chamber Summons No.1450 of 2019 is allowed in terms of
prayer Clause(a).
2. Defendant No.3 is permitted to carry out necessary amendment
as per Schedule annexed to Chamber Summons in plaint within
limitation.
3. Defendant No.3 to file amended plaint after aforesaid
compliance and serve on defendants.
4. Chamber Summons No.1450 of 2019 is disposed off,
accordingly.
(N.G. Shukla)
Judge
City Civil Court,
Date :23.08.2023 Gr. Bombay.
1. Dictated on : 23.08.2023
2. Transcribed on : 23.08.2023
3. Checked and Signed on : 25.08.2023
4. Delivered to Certified :
Copy Section on
-- 4 of 5 --
Ch.Sum No. 1450/2019 in
S.C. Suit No.964/2015. 5 Order.
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
25.08.2023 5.00 p.m. Miss K.M.Rana .
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.) HHJ Shri N.G. Shukla
(Court Room No.63).
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order 23.08.2023
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 25.08.2023
Judgment/Order uploaded on 25.08.2023
-- 5 of 5 --