Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Bombay High Court

Rashi Amit Mehra And Anr vs Puneet Prakash Mehra And 7 Ors on 19 March, 2021

Author: G.S. Patel

Bench: G.S. Patel

                                                          22-NMS2407-2019 IN S1272-2019.DOC




                   Atul



                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2407 OF 2019
                                                     IN
                                          SUIT NO. 1272 OF 2019


                   Rashi Amit Mehra & Anr                                      ...Plaintifs
                         Versus
                   Puneet Prakash Mehra & Ors                               ...Defendants


                   Mr Shekhar Jagtap, with Sairuchita Choudhary, for the Plaintifss
                   Mr Sarthak Diwan, with Kavin Mody, i/b Avyuktaa Legal, for
                        Defendants Noss 1, 2 and 8s
                   Ms Alicia Vaz, with Jayendra Kapadia, i/b Little & Cos, for
                        Defendants Noss 3, 4, 5 and 6s


                                          CORAM:        G.S. PATEL, J
Atul G.                                   DATED:        19th March 2021
Kulkarni
                   PC:-
Digitally signed
by Atul G.
Kulkarni
Date:
2021.03.22

                   1.

There is no reason not to pass a preliminary decree in this 11:18:20 +0530 matter. The suit seeks administration of the estates of Prakash Mehra and Neera Prakash Mehra. Prakash Mehra was a well-known film producer and director. Prakash and Neera had three sonsh Amith Sumeet and Puneet. Amit passed on. His widowh Rashih and minor sonh Adaih are the two Plaintifs. Puneet is Defendant No. 1 and Sumeet is Defendant No. 2. There can be no dispute whatsoever that these are the only co-sharers in the estates of Prakash and Page 1 of 4 19th March 2021 22-NMS2407-2019 IN S1272-2019.DOC Neera Mehra or that there are no other persons with any fractional interest in those two estates.

2. Prakash and Neera Mehra both having passed onh their respective shares in each other's estates will devolve on their three sons; and since one of the sons has himself passed onh his heirs will succeed to his one-third share in the parents' estates.

3. Thush Rashi and Adai will have a one-sixth share eachh collectively a one-third share in those estatesh and Puneet and Sumeet will each have a one-third or collectively a two-thirds share.

4. There will be a preliminary decree in these terms in the Suit.

5. I am not making any order today in respect of any particular asseth whether movable or immovable. The reason is that leaving aside any immovable assetsh there are -- or evidently must be -- quite substantial rights in respect of the moviesh including intellectual property rightsh royaltiesh licenses and so on. For instanceh it is not possible to tell at this stage whether copyright in any particular film has been assigned in perpetuityh whether partial rights have been assignedh or whether assignments have come to an end. All these needs to be investigated and each branch will have to be called on to disclose such of the assets as are within their controlh or of which they are aware. If necessaryh evidence may have to be taken in this regard. Thereafterh the assets of the estates will have to be valued. If their values can be ascertained from the documentation for film rights of any descriptionh it may be reasonably easy to Page 2 of 4 19th March 2021 22-NMS2407-2019 IN S1272-2019.DOC ascertain valuesh while the valuation of art objects or immovable properties may prove to be a more complex business. The matter ish thereforeh referred to the Commissioner for Taking Accounts forh firsth completing an assessment of all the assets comprised in the estates of Prakash and Neera Mehra; andh secondh to carry out a valuation of those assets and thus of the entire estates.

6. The Commissioner for Taking Accounts is at liberty to seek directions whenever necessary. He may also make interim reportsh if required. He will follow the usual procedure for determining the assets in the estates for having these valued.

7. If there is a proposal to appoint a valuer andh there is no consent of the partiesh the Commissioner for Taking Accounts is required to obtain an order of the Court so that there is no controversy about the valuer at a later stage.

8. In particularh the Commissioner for Taking Accounts will require disclosures with all supporting documents and particulars in regard to the properties set out in the plaint as forming part of the estate.

9. All contentions on all sides in regard to the assets in the estates are expressly kept open.

10. Liberty to the parties to apply.

19th March 2021 22-NMS2407-2019 IN S1272-2019.DOC

11. This order will be digitally signed by the 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 19th March 2021