Bombay High Court
Mahendra Shah And Nalini Shah vs Devang Mahendra Shah And Sheetal Devang ... on 12 October, 2018
Author: S.J. Kathawalla
Bench: S.J. Kathawalla
kpd 907 nmsl 2463 of 2018.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION (L) NO.2463 OF 2018
IN
SUIT (L) NO.1385 OF 2018
Mahendra Shahand Anr. ... Plaintiffs
Versus
Devang Mahendra Shah and Anr. ... Defendants
Mr. Vivek Kantawala alongwith Mr. Amey Patil, Ms. Bhairavi Warvdekar, Mr.
Siddharth Bafna, Mr. ArpitSolanki, Mr.Jash Vyas and Mr. Hetal Jobanputra instructed
by M/s. Vivek Kantawala and Co., for Plaintiffs.
Mr. E.B.Dixit alongwith Ms. Priyanka Dubey instructed by Mr. P.R.Yadav, for
Defendant No.1.
Mr. Karl Tamboly alongwith Mr. Sriraj G. Menon instructed by M/s. M.J.Juris, for
Defendant No.2.
CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, J.
DATE : 12th OCTOBER, 2018 P.C.:
1. Two old and very senior citizens Shri. Mahendra Shah who is 80 years old (Plaintiff No.1) and his wife Nalini Shah who is 77 years old (Plaintiff No.2), have knocked the doors of this Court with a grievance that because of the disputes and fights between their son Devang Shah ('Devang'), Defendant No.1 and his wife Sheetal Devang Shah ('Sheetal'), Defendant No.2, Sheetal has since January 2018, by torturing them and causing immense harassment to them, made their lives a living 1/8 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2018 01:44:38 ::: kpd 907 nmsl 2463 of 2018.doc hell. They are constantly living under stress / tension, under an apprehension that Sheetal will harm them physically and will also damage/destroy their property. Since they are unable to withstand her tortious and obnoxious conduct any more, they have filed the present Suit, interalia seeking directions against Devang and Sheetal to leave the house owned by Plaintiff No.1, along with their belongings.
2. The facts as stated by the Plaintiffs are set out hereunder :-
(i) Navyug Co-operative Housing Society Limited ('the said Society') is the Lessor in respect of 30160 sq. yards of the Juhu Parle Development Scheme. By an Indenture of Conveyance, executed as far back as on 14 th October, 1956, the Bombay Housing Board granted a Lease to the said Society and also executed a Conveyance in respect of 30160 sq. yards being the larger property, for the purpose of a housing scheme. Plaintiff No.1 and his brother are at present Lessees in respect of Plot No.20, 3rd Road, Juhu, admeasuring 6000 square feet. A house named 'Saprem' admeasuring 3000 sq. ft. is constructed by Plaintiff No.1, and the balance plot is being used and occupied by the other co-owner and brother of the Plaintiff No.1.
(ii) The marriage between Devang and Sheetal took place on 26 th December, 1994.
Devang and Sheetal have two children, named, Maahir and Veer who are 20 and 15 years old respectively. Maahir is studying at the University of Southern California and Veer is studying at the University in Nadal, Spain.
(iii) Sheetal, is the daughter of Dr. Ashok Kothari. Sheetal is a Commerce Graduate 2/8 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2018 01:44:38 ::: kpd 907 nmsl 2463 of 2018.doc
from Mithibai College. She is a fashion designer and was also into designing of jewellery, having done her course in jewellery designing from the Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council and also from Graham and Walker - a British Company. Sheetal was allowed by Plaintiff No.1 to use the garage adjacent to their house admeasuring 800 sq.ft., to carry on her business.
(iv) After 23 years of marriage, disputes arose between Sheetal and Devang.
(v) Sheetal first instituted proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act being DV Case No.150 of 2018, which is pending in the Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Andheri. Thereafter, after residing with the Plaintiffs for 23 years, she made allegations against the Plaintiffs and Devang by filing proceedings against them under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against the Plaintiffs and Defendant No.1. She also invoked the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, suggesting that her PAN Card details and Income tax Returns were forged and fabricated.
(vi) Sheetal in order to extort huge amounts from the Plaintiffs, stopped carrying on her business and started, not only causing immense harassment to the Plaintiffs, but also indulged in acts which would not only cause grave harm and injury to the Plaintiffs but may also cost them their lives. She inter-alia started removing all the artifacts and paintings from the house, tore the sofa, destroyed the chairs lying in the hall; would break glasses and cutlery in the house, damage the furniture such as curtains, dining chairs, lamps, fittings etc., started pouring sticky liquids on the 3/8 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2018 01:44:38 ::: kpd 907 nmsl 2463 of 2018.doc floors/staircase on the marble flooring in the house, used unparliamentary language, took away idols to hurt the religious sentiments of the Plaintiffs and rushed to the local police station for filing N.C.s levelling false charges inter-alia against the Plaintiffs with a view to show that she is a lady in distress who was the victim of gruesome atrocities meted out to her by the Plaintiffs and their son.
(vii) The Plaintiffs who were left with no other alternative, installed 13 cameras throughout their house except the bedrooms. Even after the cameras were installed, Sheetal continued to pour sticky liquids on the marble floorings of the house, break cutlery in the house, sprinkled chocolate/strawberry sauce on the sofa, chairs, floorings etc. All this was done to create fear in the Plaintiffs and to extort a huge sum of money from them, being the price for leaving their house.
(viii) The Plaintiffs filed a series of complaints with the Juhu Police Station qua the cruel treatment meted out to them by Sheetal, copies of which are annexed to the Plaint, but the Police Authorities have failed to come to the rescue of the Plaintiffs.
(ix) The Plaintiffs being unable to bare the torture and humiliation meted out to them by Sheetal, employed care-takers in the house (who are termed as bouncers by Sheetal) but they too are helpless when Sheetal indulges in the aforestated obnoxious and intolerable acts.
(x) Initially, Devang would intervene when Sheetal behaved in the aforestated manner. However, gradually Devang started being indifferent, leaving the Plaintiffs 4/8 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2018 01:44:38 ::: kpd 907 nmsl 2463 of 2018.doc completely helpless, with several questions and doubts in the minds of the Plaintiffs.
(xi) Sheetal in the pending legal/court proceedings has made irresponsible allegations against the Police Officials, against her own Advocates and also against the Public Prosecutor.
(xii) The Plaintiffs are therefore compelled to file the present Suit and move for urgent ad-interim relief seeking ouster of Devang as well as Sheetal from their house.
2. The Learned Advocate appearing for the Plaintiffs has shown certain CCTV footage, from which one can see that Sheetal enters the kitchen with a cup/glass and just drops it in front of the domestic help who is giving a helpless look in view of her conduct; Sheetal brings some liquid and sprinkles it on the last step of the internal staircase; Sheetal repeatedly goes into the kitchen, brings some liquid and throws some sticky substance on the flooring in front of all the family members and house help/care-taker; Sheetal whilst throwing the sticky substance (chocolate/strawberry sauce) on the flooring is also spilling the same on the chairs/sofa having very good upholstery; Sheetal is dragging/picking up the washing machine from the washing area to the upper floor all through the internal staircase; liquid is seen to be poured down from side of the internal staircase from the 1st floor to the hall area; Sheetal is seen opening the main door of the house several times and just banging the same.
3. The Learned Advocate appearing for the Plaintiffs therefore submitted that though admittedly the house belongs to the Plaintiffs, they are not allowed to stay 5/8 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2018 01:44:38 ::: kpd 907 nmsl 2463 of 2018.doc peacefully in their own house during the twilight days of their lives. It is submitted that the Plaintiffs at their age cannot live in their own house under fear/apprehension that their life and limb is at risk at the hands of their daughter-in-law, who has filed several false and frivolous litigation against them starting from the year 2018, after residing with them for 23 years, only because she is unable to get along with Devang.
4. Learned Advocate representing Devang informed the Court that it is not that Devang is not wanting to protect his parents when Sheetal misbehaves with them, however, he is not interfering because of the false allegations repeatedly made against him by Sheetal and based on such allegations, the false police complaint and court cases filed against him. He has produced a Letter dated 28 th July, 2018 addressed by Mrs. Usha Tanna and Associates, Advocates for Sheetal, which is addressed to Sheetal, wherein she has set out the alleged conduct of Sheetal not only with the said Advocate, but with several of her earlier Advocates.
5. In view thereof, this Court turned to Counsel Mr. Karl Tamboly appearing for Sheetal. The Court along with the Advocates for the Parties went through the CCTV footage on a laptop. The Court asked Mr. Tamboly to show the CCTV footage to Sheetal to enable her to explain her conduct which can be witnessed therein. Mr. Tamboly tendered some photographs showing bruises on the limbs / stomach of Sheetal and also showing some altercation taking place between Devang and Sheetal. This Court informed Mr. Tamboly that if Devang and Sheetal are having problems, 6/8 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2018 01:44:38 ::: kpd 907 nmsl 2463 of 2018.doc the Plaintiffs cannot be tortured and harassed by Sheetal in the aforestated manner. The Court also informed Mr. Tamboly, appearing for Sheetal and Mr. Dixit appearing for Devang that if their Clients have not allowed the parents of Defendant No. 1 to live in peace, in their own house, atleast they (the said parents) have a right to die in peace in their own house. If Devang and Sheetal cannot get along and if they are having constant fights, they have no right to stay in the house and make the life of the Plaintiffs a living hell under the garb/pretext that the same is the matrimonial home of the daughter-in-law - Sheetal. This is certainly not their age to constantly attend Police Stations and Courts. Mr. Tamboly requested that the matter be kept back, so that he can show the CCTV footage to Sheetal and take instructions in the matter. After two hours, Mr. Tamboly informed the Court that he has shown the CCTV footage to Sheetal and after speaking to Sheetal, he as well as the Advocate on record have decided not to represent Sheetal in the above matter. However, Mr. Tamboly requested that Sheetal wants time to file her Affidavit-in-Reply. When this Court adjourned the matter to 15th October, 2018, Mr. Tamboly at the request of Sheetal, submitted that Sheetal would file her Reply and appear with a new Advocate on 16 th October, 2018. Mr. Tamboly also requested that Sheetal be shown the entire CCTV footage which are in possession of the Plaintiffs. Mr. Tamboly also conveyed the undertaking of Sheetal, who is present in Court, that she will ensure that she will not give any cause for complaint to the Plaintiffs or to the Defendant No.1 until the 7/8 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2018 01:44:38 ::: kpd 907 nmsl 2463 of 2018.doc adjourned date. Though the undertaking is accepted, the Plaintiffs pleaded that they do not trust the assurance given by Sheetal and they apprehend grave danger to their life and limb even until the adjourned date. They have submitted that though they have filed several complaints with the Juhu Police Station, the Police Authorities, except for issuing a notice under Section 149 of Criminal Procedure Code, to Devang and Sheetal, have not offered any protection to the Plaintiffs. In view thereof, Senior Inspector of Juhu Police Station shall, upon being approached by the Plaintiffs, provide necessary protection to the Plaintiffs in order to ensure that there is no act committed constituting breach of peace / law and order against them.
6. Stand over to 16th October, 2018 at 3.00 p.m.
7. The Advocate for the Plaintiffs shall on that day keep the entire CCTV footage available with the Plaintiffs, ready for viewing in Court.
( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. ) 8/8 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2018 01:44:38 :::