Order 1

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: C. C. No. 128 SW 2023 Mrs. Vijaylaxmi Vs Mr. Lallan and anr.
CNR-MHMM18-008900-2023
ORDER BELOW EXH.1
1. Perused record. Heard Ld. Advocate for the complainant/applicant.
2. This is an application under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal
Procedure, seeking direction to register the offence against the
respondents and carry out investigation in the alleged acts.
3. The application is supported by affidavit. Compliance of Section
154(2) done. Alleged offences are cognizable in nature. Thus, the basic
requirements are satisfied.
4. The summary of the allegations is that the applicant/complainant
Mrs. Vijay Laxmi Jayant Kumar, is biological daughter of Mrs. Radha
Menon. She was adopted by her maternal aunt Mrs. Leela Menon. Mrs.
Leela and Mrs. Radha, were twin sisters.
5. The complainant was adopted by Mrs. Leela Menon. Said Leela
Menon, purchased a property i.e. house Green View, Water Field Road,
Bandra West, Mumbai, in the year 1971. Since then Mrs. Leela Menon,
started residing there. The complainant/applicant was also residing with
her. Mrs. Leela Menon, died on 26.02.2022. She bequeathed said
property to the complainant and probate proceeding is pending before
High Court.
6. In the month of August 2023, complainant received a letter from
City Survey Office and after an inquiry there she came to know that about
the above property a Deed of Conveyance was registered on 28.04.1981,
between Late Leela Menon and respondents. She noticed that the
signature on the said conveyance is forged.
7. It is further pleaded that there were certain transactions took place
between late Leela Menon, respondents and other persons and other facts
occurred. However, the signature on deed of conveyance is forged.
Page - 1/2
-- 1 of 2 --
C. C. No. 128 SW 2023 Mrs. Vijaylaxmi Vs Mr. Lallan and anr.
CNR-MHMM18-008900-2023
8. If whole contents of the application read in context with each other
i.e. from the facts pleaded in the beginning and leading to it’s end, those
are somewhat confusing and reflect that there were certain transactions
took place between both the parties. The transactions are somewhat vague
and create doubt leading to inference that something has been suppressed
by the applicant. Further, majority of the offences alleged and their
ingredients reflect that evidence is only in the form of documentary
evidence, which can be produced in the court itself by applicant. If any
need is felt regarding additional evidence or other facts, the investigation
can be ordered under Section 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
9. The prayer sought for is having serious consequences and for
granting it there must be strong case made out on the basis of sufficient
material. On this test, for the reasons discussed above this application
fails. The recording of verification will serve the purpose, hence order -
ORDER
Prayer for registration of offence and directing investigation as per
Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure is rejected. Matter is kept
for recording of verification of complainant.
MUMBAI (KOMALSING RAJPUT)
DATE – 30.08.2024 J.M.F.C., 12TH COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI
Page - 2/2
-- 2 of 2 --