Amod Nandkishore Mehra vs Ashok Nandkishore Mehra on 15 March, 2021

[Cites 1, Cited by 8]

Bombay High Court

Amod Nandkishore Mehra vs Ashok Nandkishore Mehra on 15 March, 2021

Bench: G.S. Patel

                                                              20-TS-181-2014 IN TP-565-2014.DOC




                      Arun



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION
                                  TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO. 181 OF 2014
                                                       IN
                               TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 565 OF 2014


                      Amod Nandkishore Mehta                                       ...Plaintif
                           Versus
                      Ashok Nandkishore Mehta & Anr                            ...Defendants


                      Mr Dharam Jumani, with Ms Gauri Joshi, i/b Ganesh & Co, for the
                           Plaintiff.
                      Ms Srushti Thorat, i/b Prem Gidwani, for the Defendant.


                                            CORAM:        G.S. PATEL, J
                                            DATED:        15th March 2021
                      PC:-


                      1.

The Plaintif seeks to mark 11 documents in evidence. ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Digitally signed by

2. The document at Sr. No.1 is an original letter of 10th March ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Date: 2021.03.16 2003 from the deceased to the police. This has been sufciently 10:46:29 +0530 identifed in paragraph 6 of the Evidence Afdavit of the Plaintif. Subject to proof of correctness of contents the document is taken on record and marked in evidence as Exhibit "P1".

3. The document at Sr. No. 2 is a photocopy of the Will in question dated 11th December 2002. The original Will is in Court.

Page 1 of 4

15th March 2021 20-TS-181-2014 IN TP-565-2014.DOC In view of the Evidence Afdavit of the attesting witness, it is taken on record and marked in evidence as Exhibit "P2". The marking of this document in evidence does not indicate that the Defendants have accepted its authenticity, due execution or attestation. All contentions are left open for cross-examination and arguments.

4. The document at Sr. No. 3 is an original receipt signed by the deceased. It is identifed in the Plaintiffs Evidence Afdavit in paragraph 15. It is taken on record and marked in evidence as Exhibit "P3".

5. The document at Sr. No. 4 is a copy of the Consent Terms dated 17th September 2009 fled in this Court. The original is always available, but nonetheless the document is taken on record and marked in evidence as Exhibit "P4".

6. The document at Sr. No. 5 is a certifed copy of a judgment dated 6th February 2010. It is taken on record and marked in evidence as Exhibit "P5".

7. The documents at Sr. Nos. 6 to 10 are certifed copies of various orders by various Courts. These are marked in evidence as Exhibit "P6", Exhibit "P7", Exhibit "P8", Exhibit "P9" and Exhibit "P10".

8. The document at Sr. No. 11 is an original letter by the 2nd Defendant to the deceased. Subject to proof of correctness of contents it is marked in evidence as Exhibit "P11".

Page 2 of 4

15th March 2021 20-TS-181-2014 IN TP-565-2014.DOC

9. The original death certifcate annexed to the Additional Afdavit is taken on record and marked in evidence as Exhibit "P12".

10. The Additional Afdavit in Support of the Caveat is allowed to be fled. It does not raise further issues but it supplements the existing issues already taken on fle.

11. By consent, Ms Geeta Sonawane, learned Advocate of this Court, is appointed as a Commissioner and is requested to record the cross-examination of the Plaintiffs frst witness.

(a) The Commissioner is at liberty to exercise discretion under Order XVIII Rule 4(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to note the demeanour of the witnesses where necessary.

(b) All cross-examination shall be conducted strictly in question and answer form.

(c) The Commissioner will also be at liberty to direct that the whole or any part of the cross-examination should be video recorded for later reference of the court.

Should that be done, the original audio visual recording will be submitted along with the Commissionerfs Report to the Registry.

(d) Liberty to the parties as also to the Commissioner to apply in case of difculty.

(e) All re-examination will be conducted only in court.

Page 3 of 4

15th March 2021 20-TS-181-2014 IN TP-565-2014.DOC (f ) Costs of the commission shall be borne equally by the parties.

(g) Parties shall also pay costs of Rs. 500/- per hearing to the Court Clerk who attends the Commission with Court Papers. This is required since these clerks attend the commission in addition to their regular duties and outside their normal working hours;

(h) The Commissioner is not to permit any applications for adjournment on dates previously fxed, except where absolutely unavoidable. Counselfs inconvenience or unavailability does not constitute such unavoidability.

12. List the matter on 26th April 2021 for a status report including as to progress before the Commissioner.

13. This order will be digitally signed by the Personal Assistant/ Private Secretary of this Court. All concerned will act on production of a digitally signed copy of this order.

(G. S. PATEL, J) Page 4 of 4 15th March 2021

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Bombay High Court