Sunetra Dattatraya Saple An ANR v. Vidya Bala Krishna Shenoy And ANR

kvm 1/2 16-CST144.18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 144 OF 2018 IN TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO. 12O OF 2016 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 293 OF 2016 Ms.Shailabala Kamat @ Shailabala d/o Vinayak Kamat @ Kamat Shailabala Vinayak ..... Deceased Vidya Balakrishna Shenoy & Anr.

..... Applicants

IN THE MATTER BEWTEEN

Sunetra Dattatraya Saple & Anr.

..... Petitioners

VERSUS

Vidya Balakrishna Shenoy & Anr.

..... Defendants/ Caveators Ms.S.M.Dandekar for the Applicants.

Ms.Prasanna Deshmukh, i/b. Mr.Shekhar Jagtap for the Respondents/Original Plaintiffs.

CORAM :

R.D. DHANUKA, J.

DATE :

5th DECEMBER, 2018 P.C.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners states that the learned advocate on record proposes to apply for his discharge in the matter. No affidavit in reply is filed by the original petitioner though served with this chamber summons in advance.

2.

Heard Ms.Dandekar, learned counsel appearing for the

kvm 2/2 16-CST144.18 applicants and I have perused the averments made in the affidavit in support of the chamber summons. The applicants claim to be the legal heirs of the said deceased Ms.Shailabala Kamat and has already obtained succession certificate of the said deceased Ms.Shailabala Kamat. She submits that no citation was served upon her clients though they are Class II legal heirs. No affidavit in reply is filed by any of the petitioners.

3.

The applicants are accordingly permitted to be impleaded as defendant nos. 3 and 4.

4.

The original petitioners are directed to carry out amendment within two weeks from today. It is made clear that if the petitioners does not carry out amendment within two weeks from today, the applicants to this chamber summons would be permitted to carry out amendment.

5.

Chamber summons is allowed in the aforesaid terms. No orders as to costs.

[R.D. DHANUKA, J.]