Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Gopal Lachhmandas Raheja And Anr vs Suresh Lachhmandas Raheja And 4 Ors And ... on 3 June, 2019

Author: K.R.Shriram

Bench: K.R.Shriram

                                         1/2                           chscd-344-17(45).doc




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 ORDINARY AND ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
               COMMERCIAL CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.344 OF 2017
                                    IN
                     COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO.27 OF 2017

Sonali Nimish Arora                                  ..Applicant/Intervener

In the matter between
Gopal Lachhmandas Raheja and Anr                      ..Plaintiffs
       Vs.
Suresh Lachhmandas Raheja & Ors.                     ..Defendants

Mr. Sarosh Bharucha a/w Ms Aditi Bhansali I/b Vashi and Vashi for Plaintiff
No.2
Mr. Chirag mody a/w Mr. Vyom Shah, Ms Archana Karmokar and Ms
Shraddha Ambre I/b Divya Shah Associates for Applicant
Mr. Bharat Zaveri I/b M/s Kanga and Co. for Defendant Nos.1 to 5


                                         CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J.

DATE : 3rd JUNE 2019 P.C.:

1 Mr. Bharucha appearing for plaintiff no.2 opposes the chamber summons. No affidavit in reply, however, is on record. 2 It is a fight between applicant and plaintiff no.2 who are siblings and children of original plaintiff no.1. It is common knowledge that before the demise of plaintiff no.1, plaintiff nos.1 and 2 had separated and there are many suits pending in this court, one of which has also been heard by me. In that suit, applicant has been made party as legal heir of plaintiff no.1 and it is bitterly contested matter.

3                 Mr. Bharucha states that chamber summons was served


Meera Jadhav




          ::: Uploaded on - 06/06/2019                ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2019 03:57:37 :::
                                          2/2                            chscd-344-17(45).doc




sometime in 2017 and still is seeking time to file affidavit in reply. 4 Mr. Mody appearing for applicant strongly opposes and submits that the chamber summons should be allowed as uncontested. 5 Purely by way of indulgence and a fight between applicant and plaintiff no.2 will only enure to the benefit of defendants, I am inclined to grant some time. At the same time, plaintiff no.2 should be put to terms. 6 Plaintiff no.2 shall give donation of Rs.5 lacs to National Defence Fund (NDF), State Bank of Inida, Institutional Division, Parliament Street, New Delhi, Account No.11084239799-www.pmindia.nic.in, and also pay a sum of Rs.1 lac as cost to applicant, which shall be paid by way of cheque drawn in favour of advocate on record for applicant. These amounts shall be paid within two weeks from today. Affidavit in reply shall also be filed and copy served, within two weeks from today and rejoinder, if any, to be filed and copy served within one week thereafter. Chamber summons be listed for hearing on 8th July 2019.
7 It is made clear that, if the amounts as directed above are not paid, the chamber summons will stand allowed and accordingly disposed as per the prayer clauses (a) and (b), without further reference to this court.

(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Meera Jadhav ::: Uploaded on - 06/06/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2019 03:57:37 :::