1 PGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Notice of Motion No.2477 of 2008 IN Suit No.2132 of 2008 Smt.Saroj Subhash Dalvi & ors. .. .. Plaintiffs v/s. Vinay alias Victor Ram Mahadik .. Defendant Mr.K.P. Sreeji i/by Sreeji & Lal for Plffs. Mr.Snehal Shah with Mr.Vishal Kanade i/by Narayanan & Narayanan for Deft. ---- CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 13th April, 2010 P.C. : 1.This is an administrative Suit filed by 3 sisters against one brother. The parties are the heirs and legal representatives of one Ramchandra Mahadik. The properties mentioned in the Schedule at Exhibit-A to the Plaint are admittedly the properties of the deceased father of the parties. The relationship between the parties is also admitted. 2.However, the Defendant claims that under a writing executed by the sisters, who are the Plaintiffs in this Suit, they have given up their right, title and interest in the suit properties. The writing is 2 unregistered. The Defendant, however, claims absolute title to all the properties mentioned in Exhibit-A to the Plaint. 3.Subject to the Defendant proving the writing and subject to the writing being admissible in evidence for such proof, the Defendant would be entitled to all the properties. If that is proved, the Plaintiffs would be entitled to an equal share each in the properties left by their deceased father. 4.The Suit deserves to be settled between the parties. The parties have negotiated but have not been able to settle. 5.The valuation of the properties is disputed. The parties shall be entitled to obtain valuation at their costs and further negotiate the settlement, if they can. 6.Pending Suit, however, the Defendant shall not deal with, dispose of, transfer, alienate, encumber or part with possession or create any third party in any of the immovable properties mentioned in the Schedule, Exhibit-A to the Plaint, save and except that one shop at Dadar is in possession of the Defendant and one M/s.Sanghvi Brothers. The Defendant shall not further 3 induct other parties in the suit premises, pending Suit. 7.There is one flat in Shantikunj. The parties require to make an inventory of all the movables and documents lying in the suit flat. Both parties claim that certain Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) and other investments of the deceased are lying in the suit flat. They would have matured. They require to be liquidated, consolidated, reinvested and deposited in the account to the credit of the suit. 8.Parties and their Advocates shall attend the suit flat on 24.4.2010 at 4 p.m. to make the necessary inventory. After the amount of the investment is deposited to the credit of the suit, it shall be invested by the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court in FDR in any Nationalised Bank, initially for a period of 37 months. 9.Written Statement is filed. 10.The relationship between the parties is not disputed. The properties, both movable and immovable mentioned in the Schedule, Exhibit-A to the Plaint, are admitted. 11.Issues : (i) Whether the Defendant proves that the 4 Plaintiffs executed the writing dated 11.4.1994 in favour of the Defendant. (ii)Whether the writing dated 11.4.1994 is required to be compulsorily registered. (iii) What relief, if any, are the Plaintiffs entitled to ? 12.In view of the aforesaid admissions, the Defendant shall have the right to begin under Order XVIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 13.The Defendant shall file his Affidavit of examination- in-chief on or before 7th June 2010. 14.Suit is adjourned to 10th June 2010 for considering admissibility of the documents, if any, relied upon by the Defendant in the Affidavit of examination-in-chief. 15.The Notice of Motion is disposed of accordingly. (SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.)