Sameer Gulamnabi Kazi v. Ruhinaz Shakil Shaikh
Vaishalil Tikam IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 31487 OF 2025 IN SUIT (L) NO. 31483 OF 2025 VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Sameer Gulamnabi Kazi .. Applicant In the matter between by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date:
2026.01.14 15:03:28 +0530 Sameer Gulamnabi Kazi .. Plaintiff
Versus
Ruhinaz Shaikh and Ors.
Defendants WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 35610 OF 2025 IN SUIT (L) NO. 31483 OF 2025 Azhar Tamboli .. Applicant In the matter between Sameer Gulamnabi Kazi .. Plaintiff
Versus
Ruhinaz Shaikh and Ors.
Defendants ....................
Mr. Rahul P. Jain i/b. Alpha Chambers, Advocate for ApplicantPlaintiff. Mr. Hasnain Kazi a/w. Ms. Shraddha Vakhal a/w. Ms. Simran Shaikh, Advocates for Defendant No. 2. (IAL 35610/2025). Mr.Abhishek Mookherjee i/b. Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, Advocates for Defendant No.3.
Ms. Amishi Sodani i/b. Ms. Charu Shukla for Defendant No.5. ...................
CORAM
: MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : JANUARY 12, 2026 P.C.
:
1.
Heard, Mr. Jain, learned Advocate for Plaintiff/Applicant, Mr. Kazi, learned Advocate for Defendant No.2, Mr. Mookherjee,
learned Advocate for Defendant No.3 and Ms. Sodani, learned Advocate for Defendant No.5.
2.
Interim Application (L) No. 31487 of 2025 has been disposed of, it is kept for compliance today. 3.
Learned Advocates at the bar representing the Plaintiff and Defendant No.2 inform the Court that the said compliance has been effected. No further orders are required to be passed then. 4.
Defendant No.2 has filed Interim Application (L) No.35610 of 2025. The learned Advocate for Plaintiff does not raise any objection to the said application seeking amendment to the written statement filed by Defendant No.2.
5.
Interim Application(L) No. 35610 of 2025 stands allowed and disposed of. Appropriate amendment is permitted to be carried out within a period of four weeks from today. Re-verification stands dispensed with.
6.
Ms. Sodani, learned Advocate appears for Defendant No.4 and other Defendants. She raises a grievance that continuation of Defendant No.4 is not warranted in view of the Interim Application having been decided by the Court.
7.
The Advocate for the Plaintiff shall take appropriate instructions and apprise the Court on the next adjourned date so that
further orders can be passed for deletion of Defendant No.4 and /or other Defendants as required
8. List the matter on 09/02/2026.
Vaishali Tikam [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]