:1: :1: :1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. O.O.C.J. O.O.C.J. NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3575 OF 2004 IN PETITION NO. 527 OF 2004 Mr. Niraj Gunvant Kakad ..Petitioner vs. Mr. Mitul Gunvant Kakad and anr. ..Respondents A.S. Doctor i/b. Hariyani and Co. for the petitioner. Mrs. A.R. Lambay for the Respondents/Caveator. CORAM: S.U. KAMDAR, J. CORAM: S.U. KAMDAR, J. CORAM: S.U. KAMDAR, J. DATE : 11TH AUGUST, 2005. DATE : 11TH AUGUST, 2005. DATE : 11TH AUGUST, 2005. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : 1. The present notice of motion has been taken out by the petition for the disclosure on oath the assets being movable and immovable properties of the deceased. In so far this prayer is concerned the respondents have filed affidavit in reply dated 18.1.2005 and has :2: :2: :2: stated therein that the large number of properties which are sought to be included in the Schedule-I to the petition does not belong to the deceased. It has also been mentioned in the affidavit-in-reply that the estate of the deceased has been administered by the respondent as an executor and with the consent of all beneficiaries. In the present petition he is also claiming the properties of HUF. The father of the petitioner has died as far back as 8/2/88 i.e. almost 17 years back leaving behind the will dated 26/5/87. It is the case of the respondent that during the aforesaid period of 17 years the said properties are distributed as per the will. However the petitioner contends that since he was minor at the relevant time he is now attaining age of majority entitled to claim the aforesaid reliefs. He further contends that injunction should be granted inrespect of properties which are within his knowledge as belonging to the deceased. He contends that the respondents should be directed to disclosed the properties and thereafter :3: :3: :3: injunction order should be passed. 2. In my opinion in the present notice of motion which is initiated after 17 years of the death of the deceased no such injunction order can be granted even without disclosure by the petitioner, the properties in respect of which he is seeking injunction. According to the respondents the said properties are distributed and the mother of the petitioner was party to it. Merely because the petitioner was minor at the relevant time no interim orders can be passed after 17 years on the ground that he has now attained majority. In view thereof motion dismissed. No order as to costs. *************