-1- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4286 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO.3086 OF 2007. Mrs.Deepa Manoj Punjabi. ..Plaintiff. v/s. Mrs. Jyoti Ajit Ramchandani. ..Defendant. .... Mr.J.P.Singh, for the Plaintiff. Mr.C.D. Patel, i/b.G.A. Jain, for the Defendant. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 17TH DECEMBER, 2008. : 17TH DECEMBER, 2008. : 17TH DECEMBER, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. . The suit is filed by the plaintiff for a declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to half share in the suit flat "D-31" in the Self Help Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., St. Francis Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai-400 056. The plaintiff and the defendant are sisters. Admittedly, the suit flat belonged to Mrs. Rajni M. Mirchandani, i.e. the aunt of the plaintiff and the defendant. On 19th April 2006, the said Mrs.Rajni Mirchandani admittedly had executed a nomination form under section 30 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 read with Rule 25 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 and nominated the plaintiff and the defendant as her nominees to the suit flat. It is the defendant’s case that after -2- the demise of her aunt Mrs. Rajni Mirchandani, the plaintiff had executed a Relinquishment Deed on 4th May 2006, whereunder she had relinquished her rights in the suit flat in favour of the defendant. Pursuant to the said Relinquishment Deed, the society transferred the suit flat in the defendant’s name, vide its meeting held on 12th May 2006 and the society has made the necessary endorsement on the original share certificate of the suit flat, which is produced before this Court. 2. The plaintiff has disputed the said document. The plaintiff has also pointed out that certain police complaints as well as the complaints to the society were filed, alleging that the defendant’s signature was obtained on certain documents under coercion and undue influence. An ad-interim application was made by the plaintiff on 27th November 2007, when the defendant’s statement that she would not create any third party rights in respect of the suit flat was recorded. 3. After considerable arguments, the counsel appearing for the parties have by consent agreed that the notice of motion be disposed of in terms of prayer clause (b). The notice of motion is, therefore, by consent made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b). There would be -3- no order as to costs. The defendant through her advocate undertakes that the defendant shall pay all society outgoings till date if the same are unpaid and will continue to pay the same in future. Undertaking accepted. 4. Notice of motion stands disposed of accordingly. [S.J.‘KATHAWALLA, [S.J.‘KATHAWALLA, [S.J.‘KATHAWALLA, J.] J.] J.]