SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Bom) 103

High Court of Judicature at Bombay
ROSHAN DALVI, J.
Uday Narendra Shah
Versus
Narendra Amritlal Shah
Notice of Motion (L) No. 2347 of 2013 In Suit (L) No. 1069 of 2013
Decided On: 18-01-2014

Advocates appeared:
For the Plaintiff:Ashish Kamat, Bankim Gangar i/b. Negandhi, Shah & Himayatulla, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Gaurang Mehta a/w. Ms. Nikita Menon, Advocates.

The judgment established the application of Hindu succession laws, inheritance rights, and property ownership principles in determining the plaintiff's claims and the defendant's obligations.

Headnote:

Hindu Succession Act - Inheritance Rights - Bombay Rent Act, 1947 - Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 - Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937 - Coparcenary Property - Joint Hindu Family Property

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff, son of the defendant, sought administration of his deceased mother's estate and disclosure of the remainder of the estate. He claimed ownership of properties bequeathed to him and sought injunctions against alienation. The defendant opposed the grant of ad-interim reliefs.

Finding of the Court:

The court considered the properties comprising the estate, including a flat, a garage, and shares in private companies. It ruled in favor of the plaintiff for injunctions on specific properties but denied relief on others. The defendant was ordered to disclose the estate assets within 30 days.

Issues: Partition of immovable properties, ownership of bequeathed properties, tenancy rights, and inheritance rights under various acts were key issues.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied principles of Hindu succession, coparcenary property, and joint Hindu family property to determine inheritance and ownership rights. It interpreted relevant acts and legal provisions to decide on the injunctions and disclosure of estate assets.

Final Decision: The court granted injunctions on specific properties, denied relief on others, and ordered the defendant to disclose the estate assets within 30 days.

Judgment

1. The plaintiff is the son of the defendant. The defendant's wife, the plaintiff's mother, expired on 10th June, 2013 leaving behind a registered will dated 2nd July 2011. The plaintiff has sought administration of her estate. The plaintiff has also sought disclosure of the remainder of the estate which the plaintiff has no knowledge of. The plaintiff is the sole beneficiary under the will of the deceased which has been sought to be probated. The plaintiff claims to be the owner of the properties bequeathed by the deceased to him and the usual injunction against alienation of those properties.

2. In the suit the plaintiff has claimed partition of immovable properties that have been bequeathed to him and mandatory injunction directing to handover those properties to the plaintiff and the usual permanent injunctions against alienation.

3. The defendant has filed his affidavit-in-reply to the notice of motion to oppose the grant of ad-interim reliefs. The plaintiff has filed the rejoinder thereto.

4. For considering the properties which constituted the estate of the deceased the cases of the respective parties are required to be seen for the grant of the injunctive reliefs claimed. The plaintiff has set out the properties comprising the estate of the deceased in the list of immovable properties Exhibit-C and the list of movable properties, Exhibit-D to the plaint. For the purpose of notice of motion, a consideration of the immovable properties is required.

5. The plaintiff claims 1/2 undivided share which the deceased had in flat No.14, Premkunj Co-op. Hsng, Society Ltd., Sion (West), Mumbai-400 022. The defendant resides in that flat. The plaintiff had left that premises upon certain disputes between the parties prior to the death of the deceased. In the notice of motion the usual injunctions against sale and alienation of that property would suffice.

6. The plaintiff also claims tenancy rights in the garage No.1 in Urvashi Building, Sion(West), Mumbai-400 022. It is stated to be a parking garage. It is contended that it is neither a residential nor a commercial premises. It is not covered under Section 5(11) (c) (i) or (ii) of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947 or Section 7(15)(d) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. It would have to be seen in the suit whether a garage would devolve upon any member of the family of the deceased upon the death of the tenant as a statutory tenant cannot bequeath the tenancy right as held in the case of Vasant Pratap Pandit Vs. Dr. Anant Trimbak Sabnis 1994 Mh.L.J. 1450; However that judgment considered a commercial or a residential premises. A parking garage in which user and occupation was only parking vehicles would not be on par with a residential or commercial premises in which some of the heirs of the deceased live or carry on business along with the deceased during the life time of the deceased. The garage may revert back to the owner upon the death of the tenant or may devolve upon the heirs in equal shares. Upon such consideration of the law the title which may pass upon the bequest would be considered. Pending that the garage must be protected against alienation and sale.

7. The plaintiff has made an unusual claim upon an unusual bequest under the will of the deceased. The will, Exhibit-B to the plaint, shows inter alia as one of the properties of the deceased whatever “monies” that come to “my share” in the account of Narendra Amrutlal Shah (NAS) HUF which includes 1/3 share of NAS HUF in a bungalow situate at Ashwamegh Co-op. Hsng. Society in Ahmadabad. The title of the deceased to give her a right to bequeath the property would have to be seen in the monies that would come to her share in a HUF of her husband, the defendant herein. The husband was alive on the date of the will as also on the date of her death. The deceased was not a widow. The deceased did not get the share which belonged to her husband in the HUF upon her husband's death as per Section 3 of the Hindu Women's Right















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top